Trigger Warning for descriptions of police violence and forcible miscarriage, as well as discussions of racism and victim-blaming.

LaDonna Dixon claims that last June, an Indianapolis police officer beat her severely after she argued with him — even though she was in handcuffs, and even though she says that she told him she was pregnant at the time. As a result, she received two black eyes, numerous other bruises, and miscarried her pregnancy shortly thereafter at the jail processing center, after being refused medical treatment. (Note: links contain graphic images of Dixon’s injuries.) Local NBC affiliate WTHR reported on the alleged assault a month and a half ago, but wider dissemination of a local television report has produced new interest. From the WTHR report:

An Indianapolis woman is suing the city in federal court. LaDonna Dixon claims the officer beat her so severely during an arrest that she had a miscarriage.

“[He was] punching me, kicking me, after he maced me,” Dixon said.

“This person was angry, was enraged and just beat her,” said Dixon’s attorney, Everett Powell. “I would say it’s a crime.”

LaDonna Dixon is suing the city over what she claims happened in her yard last June. She says she was helping a friend who collapsed from a seizure and needed medicine.

When police arrived, the complaint says Officer Scott Childers told Dixon she was disrupting emergency crews and that she needed to get in her house.

Dixon admits she argued with Childers, but says that’s when the officer turned violent.

“He says I was resisting arrest, but I don’t see how I’m resisting when I’m already handcuffed and maced,” Dixon said.

Dixon claims that the beating continued even after she told the officer she was three months pregnant. She says she miscarried at Marion County’s arrestee processing center, just hours after her arrest.

“She was beaten so bad that she passed out,” Powell said. “She was hemorrhaging directly after getting beaten like this.”

Dixon says she was refused medical attention at the jail.

Police officers should never enact violent assaults against the citizens they are hired to protect. They certainly shouldn’t enact them as a response to a citizen’s supposed audacity to verbally disagree with them. That “talking back” is what apparently prompted the officer’s outrage and beating shows the extent not only of police authority and power, but also of the expectation that this authority and power will not ever be questioned.

It’s unclear what, exactly, Dixon was being arrested for, but it’s only relevant inasmuch as the arrest itself may have been another act of corruption. What is known is that the kind of beating Dixon endured is never acceptable, and especially not once it is taken into consideration that Dixon was handcuffed and on the ground at the time of the beating. Even if Dixon had been neither restrained nor pregnant at the time of the assault, it would have still been monstrous. That she was apparently both only makes the facts all the more egregious. The assault was not only an act of violence against a woman, it was an act that also showed a deliberate and specific disregard for her health as a woman.

The video makes clear that Dixon is still deeply mourning the loss of her pregnancy. The miscarriage of a wanted pregnancy is always a tragedy, but a violent, forcible miscarriage is an even more profound trauma. With his alleged actions, Officer Scott Childers decided to override LaDonna Dixon’s bodily autonomy and make her reproductive decisions for her. With his fists, he took control not just of her body but also of her reproductive life.

Dixon is a black women, and so there is little doubt regarding the perpetuation of racist state violence in this case. The fact is that there is a long, continuing history of police violence against communities of color, especially black communities. I do not doubt for a second that a white women — and especially, a white middle-class woman — would not have suffered the same fate under otherwise identical circumstances.

I do not need to know the alleged assailant’s race (which is currently unknown) to make that assertion. As I’ve said before (and as many others have said before me), racism isn’t just white people being mean, or even cruel or violent, to people of color. Racism is bigger than that. It’s the structures that makes such violence easy and acceptable. It’s the structures that keep non-white people disproportionately poor. It’s the social attitudes and structures that keep reinforcing that people of color are lesser people than white people. Structures like the law enforcement system as a whole. Racism is bigger than any individual person. And while white people are the most culpable for upholding racist systems, they’re not the only ones who can and do actively participate in them.

In response to all of her claims and their wider implications, LaDonna Dixon is not exactly receiving unconditional sympathy from the pubic. She is, largely, being treated like a rape victim. No, I don’t mean that she’s being treated with sensitivity and compassion and tenderness. I mean that in comment sections across the interent (trigger warning) she’s being treated like a liar who made the whole thing up. A liar who should have come forward sooner if all of this really happened. A liar who just wants money. A liar who was never even pregnant, and certainly never really believed she was one way or the other. A liar who is black, and therefore deserving of racialized scorn, slurs, and stereotypes, who must be a liar, because just look at the color of her skin. A liar whose boyfriend probably beat her up, anyway, and yet is still not a victim. A liar who is incapable of being genuinely victimized.

I’ve written before about how many women — all women, really, but marginalized women most of all — are viewed in our culture as unrapeable. Women like LaDonna Dixon — and women like Duanna Johnson, for that matter, whose on-duty assailant just pleaded guilty after his first trial resulted in a hung jury and is likely to receive less time than lots of individuals do for drug possession — are apparently similarly unbeatable. So repulsive just by being who she is that she is seen as not worth anybody’s time to beat, and certainly not worth getting all upset about if she was. She’s perceived by countless misogynistic, racist bigots as simply unable to be abused, because any abuse committed at her doesn’t matter.

It’s these attitudes that make assaults like this alleged one possible. It’s these attitudes that makes them absolutely guaranteed to be committed again.

via radicallyhottoff

Trigger Warning for graphic descriptions of violence against people with disabilities, school violence, and victim-blaming.

As evidenced by a recent post, violence of all kinds is a major problem in schools, and school administrations not only frequently fail to respond appropriately to said violence, they’re also often a direct part and/or cause of the problem.

Another example, this time of a lawsuit launched in response to non-sexual violence, was recently sent to me by Kali at Ithaca PAVE. Two years ago, a disabled child was assaulted by a bully on his school bus — as he screamed and cried for help, the school bus driver two seats in front of him watched the attack and did nothing. It took another student to stop the assault. The circumstances of the assault get even more egregious once it’s taken into account that the child’s individualized education plan states that he is to have an aide with him on the school bus — an aide who was most certainly not present on the day of the attack.

Now, years later, the elementary school student remains traumatized, afraid of school, and in need of further services as a direct result of the assault. And the school refuses to make appropriate changes to his education plan.

According to court documents, on May 5, Coolbaugh’s son got on the bus after school and sat three seats behind the bus driver Jeffrey Postle. Another student got on shortly after and sat near him, purposefully pushing into him. The student began slapping and kicking Coolbaugh’s son, which her son apparently interpreted as horseplay and not bullying in nature, the complaint says.

Coolbaugh’s complaint states the student then began kicking and pushing Coolbaugh’s son in a violent manner. He borrowed a pen from Postle and began making threatening stabbing motions toward Coolbaugh’s son.

The complaint states that an on-board video camera captured the events, and that the driver can be seen in the video glancing up in the rear-view mirror at the activity in the bus. The boys were within hearing and view of the driver, Coolbaugh alleges, but the driver made no attempt to stop the harassment or protect Coolbaugh’s son.

The student then began “beating (Coolbaugh’s son) with his fists and violently threw (him) into a seat behind Postle and upon the floor under the seat and then proceeded to pound (him) about the head and shoulders with his fists,” according to the complaint.

Coolbaugh’s son called out for help from the bus driver. The boys were eventually pulled apart by another student, court documents say.

…

“My client approached the district with these circumstances and the school district responded by failing to provide any of the specific request that my client had made,” Kopko said. He said the district refused to accept changes to the boy’s individualized educational plan. “Our contention is that this boy was emotionally traumatized by this assault such that he is in desperate need of additional educational services. That is the aim of the lawsuit – not so much monetary damages, but to give this child FAPE [free and appropriate public education].”

Surveillance footage of the assault as it is described above can be viewed here.

There are several things going on here, with regards to failures by the educational system to protect the students in its care and the treatment of people with disabilities by society at large.

Most readers here who have ever ridden a school bus will have at some point been on at least one end of bullying and harassment. Many will have at different points throughout their childhoods and adolescences acted as both bullies and victims — myself included among them. Big news stories since I stopped riding a school bus have left me with the impression that little has changed. School buses are places where bullies, harassment, and violence thrive. And as all current or past school bus passengers know, students with disabilities, particularly cognitive or intellectual disabilities, are especially vulnerable.

Bullies seek out targets that are particularly vulnerable and who lack social support. By therefore choosing targets who face systemic marginalization on the basis of identity, they’re simply being perceptive about who society values and will bother to support.

In terms of how the driver in this case responded, I think that we’re talking about a case of basic human decency. A student was literally screaming out in distress, and not only did he fail to pull the bus over and help the student, he didn’t so much as utter a word. Adults, no matter what their occupation or relation to the children involved, are ethically obligated in situations like that to do something. That it took another child to take action is despicable.

But recognizing the bus driver’s individual failure and placing the responsibility where it belongs, it’s also important to note that while things can vary greatly among different school districts, training for bus drivers in handling such episodes is frequently limited or even non-existent. It’s not just an individual failure, but a systemic one. Further, while this was clearly a major episode, recognizing and responding to smaller ones while trying to do one’s primary job — safely driving a bus full of children — can be extremely difficult.

I know that when I was a kid, I would have met suggestions of school bus chaperons with horror. For me, at the time, the bus was a place of freedom. And I still think that places where kids can be kids without facing the constantly watching eye of adults are important. But I now know that a part of that supposed “freedom” was my ability to pick on students more vulnerable than I was and the ability of students less vulnerable than I was to pick on me. I know that a part of the “freedom” was enabling of racist, ableist, sexist, homophobic, classist, and fatphobic harassment. I know that it was watching plenty of assaults, most of which I have probably forgotten, including numerous sexual assaults against my friends — all of which faced no repercussions.

And I know that all of this didn’t happen because “it’s what kids do,” but because it’s what kids think adults do. And I now know that as kids, we sadly weren’t all that far off in our suspicions.

Schools have a responsibility to counteract this perception not only through not tolerating this kind of behavior among students, but also by modeling their own behavior to ensure that the perception is at least a little bit less true. Right now, the Trumansburg Central School District is clearly doing a very poor job on all fronts.

After failing to provide an aide to the student who was explicitly supposed to have been provided with one,¹ the school has since failed to take responsibility for its disregard for students with disabilities and willingness to treat their needs as secondary to those of other students. The disregard continues, with the school claiming that the assault was not their fault, and therefore it’s not their responsibility to provide the student with a new education plan — even though the student needs such a plan to effectively learn in their school. This final point is what the lawsuit is most directly about. Despite the fact that it should not matter who is responsible when it comes to whether or not the school is obligated to provide all of its students with an accessible and appropriate learning environment, the school’s line is “not our fault, not our problem.”

They’re also engaging in some mighty nice victim-blaming:

The complaint says that the district failed Coolbaugh’s son in several ways, by not protecting him from bullying, not properly implementing the provisions of his IEP, not adequately training and supervising its employees, and other ways. Prior bullying leading up to May 5 put the district on notice that Coolbaugh’s son was facing a dangerous situation and the district could have anticipated further problems, the complaint says.The district denies that anyone could have foreseen the alleged harassment and claims Coolbaugh’s son instigated the altercation, that he was a voluntary participant in the conflict and was aware of the risks of roughhousing on the bus.

So no one could have foreseen that something like this might happen, but dammit, that kid knew what he’d be getting himself into if it did. This kind of talking out both sides of their mouths excuse-making — who knew that this could happen? except the victim, of course, who totally should have known better — ringing any bells for any one else? These are clear echos of rape culture and more proof of how all forms of violence and oppression are connected.

Many members of the community are also doing a poor job modeling basic decency and anti-ableist attitudes. While seeming to be a clear-cut case, the comments on the linked article (trigger warning) are also filled with victim-blaming, both against the child and his mother. They range from calling the mother “sue-happy” to saying that bullying is a part of growing up to arguments that the mother could just place her child in a private school to allegations that this is her fault for not driving him to school herself.

There’s a lot of apologism and classism in these comments — not everyone can afford private school, not everyone has a car, not everyone’s job has a schedule that allows them to drive their kid to school — but also a lot of ableism. The understanding here is that abled kids are “normal” and deserve to have their needs met, while disabled ones do not. The attitude is that students with disabilities, and all people with disabilities, are on their own, with no obligation from society at large to be decent and as equally accommodating to them as it is to those without disabilities. The consensus for these folks is that we — as individuals, as institutions, as a society — do not have the same responsibility to protect people with disabilities as we do towards all other people. In these people’s view, the rights that abled people have to be safe and go about their lives free of violence do not apply to people with disabilities.

And that’s how these kinds of assaults happen — not just because one kid was an ableist jerk, but because far too many of us are generally ableist jerks, who will similarly deny certain people’s bodily rights and autonomy.

Trigger Warning for transphobia/transmisogyny and abuse by health care workers. Some links also contain transphobic language.

Fifteen years ago, a woman named Tyra Hunter was involved in a car accident and in need of emergency care. Adrian Williams, the firefighter/EMT who was the first responder on the scene began treating Hunter for her injuries — but upon cutting open her pant leg, abruptly stopped treatment and instead began mocking her to the other firefighters present, as onlookers begged him to help her and Hunter gasped for breath. When she was transferred to an ER, she apparently received inadequate care there, as well, and one doctor refused to treat her.

All because she was transgender.

Tyra Hunter died shortly thereafter.

Today, access to medical care remains an enormous issue for trans* people, but is regularly ignored by cis folks. I speak not just of trans-specific health care (i.e. medical treatment specifically related to transition or one’s trans status), though such care is extremely limited and surrounded by barriers. I speak not just of issues of poverty and ability to afford to see a doctor, though this is also an enormous problem that needs immediate addressing. In this context, by “access to medical care” I mean “the confidence that once one has actually procured a visitation with a medical professional, sie will not refuse to treat you.” Even if your condition is potentially life-threatening.

In mid-July, Erin Vaught went to an emergency room in Muncie, Indiana because she was coughing up large amounts of blood (h/t). While there, because she is a trans woman, she was mocked, humiliated, called names, and outright refused treatment. Thankfully it turned out that her condition was not immediately life threatening — though there’s no indication that medical personnel knew this with confidence at the time — and she is still alive to tell her story now.

Last week, Erin Vaught shared her entire story over at the Bilerico Project. I encourage you to read her full account in addition to my summary. (Though, Trigger Warning for lots of victim-blaming in the comments.)

After arriving, the intake nurse marked her down as “male” even though her ID clearly said female, and staff proceeded to become annoyed and/or laugh at her when Vaught corrected the mistake. Staff continued to mock her, tell jokes about her, and refer to her as “it” as she underwent routine intake procedures. Following this were inappropriate questions entirely irrelevant to her medical concerns, as well as a psychiatric examination, seemingly conducted based entirely on her gender identity and presentation. And then:

I was quite mad, but I kept it in check and said, “When are we going to see a doctor?” She told me that I could not be seen until I had my doc write orders. (For tests, I think she meant.) I said “Why do I need to do that? This is an emergency room.”

She said, “Well, we don’t know how to go about treating someone with your condition.”

I responded, “I don’t even know my condition. That’s why I’m here!”

She replied, “No. Your other condition. The transvestite thing.” I felt angry, and I was fighting my hardest to keep from crying, I was embarrassed and I grabbed my son and we left quickly so they wouldn’t see me cry

It constantly amazes me that those who are tasked with saving all of our lives — who presumably entered a profession requiring a significant amount of education and long hours because they wanted to save lives — can so easily discount and put at risk the lives of certain people whose identities and/or choices that they deem unworthy. Whether it be the cis woman who will die without an abortion, or the homeless person whose needs are scoffed at, or the trans* person who is denied treatment based on the bigoted and false perception of hir body as grotesque, those who are supposed to value life most have a too frequent habit of deciding that certain, marginalized lives just don’t matter much at all.

Of course, it really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Health care workers are people, too, products of the same prejudiced society as the rest of us. The problem is that while it shouldn’t be particularly stunning, it is especially egregious when health care workers let their personal prejudices dictate their behavior.

All of us have the responsibility to be decent human beings, a responsibility that is violated every time someone engages in acts of transphobia and cis supremacy. But health care workers have graver responsibilities above and beyond this one — not just the responsibility to treat all people with dignity and respect, but the responsibility to ensure their well-being to the best of their abilities. The ability to look after a person’s health, safety, and well-being is always compromised when there is a failure to provide them with dignity and respect. The further direct refusal to attend to their health and safety at all is an outright violation — of all ethics, medical and social, and of the law.

This kind of behavior — which again, is not uncommon — treats trans* people as “untouchables,” too disgusting and strange to so much as brush against. It suggests that those whose bodies don’t look how most of society narrowly expects them to look have the potential to “infect” those who are supposedly “normal,” and it supposes that by their very nature, trans* bodies are Frankensteinian. It would be appropriately called childish if it wasn’t so incredibly harmful. Such behavior denies trans* people not just their genders and identities, but their very humanity. It has put them at enormous risk, and done them untold physical as well as mental/emotional damage. It has, as detailed above, sometimes cost them their lives.

All because cis people just can’t get the fuck over themselves. Because some cis folks think that their egos and position of superiority and “right” to avoid cooties are worth more than the right of trans* people to live.

Erin Vaught is just one woman who was brave enough — and safe enough, with enough support systems in place — to come forward with her story. She is not alone. From what she now knows, she’s not even alone with regards to this particular hospital. And until privileged people stop calling marginalized folks “it” and expecting generic “investigations” to be a sufficient response, she’s sadly going to stay in abundant company.

Trigger Warning for rape apologism/denialism and discussions of sexual violence and rape culture.

School is supposed to be a safe place for students to learn and interact with their peers. But as far too marginalized persons know, schools frequently present an environment that is the exact opposite, from being sites of sexualized gender-based violence, to racialized violence, to homophobic and transphobic violence, and other forms of physical assault and emotional injury. Too often, we think of harassment and violence in schools as “the way things are” — how they have always been, how they will always be, and something we are all helpless to change. Rarely do we recognize that these kinds of traumas don’t have to be a part of growing up, but are usually just an exaggerated (or usually exaggerated) reflection of what takes place in adult spaces.

And even more rarely do we discuss how the schools themselves, those tasked to protect students and make schools a safe place, are actively reinforcing and/or perpetuating violence themselves.

This weekend, Amandaw linked to an article on her Tumblr about a lawsuit in which a school allegedly made a rape victim “bait” in a “sting operation” to catch teens “having sex” after school. But it gets worse. Because Upper St. Clair High School failed to provide safe exit from the school to the victim, as one responsible teacher originally proposed, and instead forced her to stay on school grounds, she was raped again, along with another girl.

According to the brief by the student’s attorney, on Feb. 4, 2008, the girl went to one of her teachers, Esther von Waldow, and told her that a boy, with whom she’d had previous problems, had forced her to have sex with him after school. The Post-Gazette does not identify victims of sexual assault and has not identified the accused rapist, who pleaded guilty in juvenile court to sexual assault.

The girl told Ms. von Waldow that he forced another student to have sex, as well.

Ms. von Waldow, according to the brief, immediately went to school administrators with concerns and offered several options to make sure the girls in question got home safely. They included offering herself to walk the girls to their school bus.

But, the filing said, school Principal Michael Ghilani had a different idea.

“Instead, Ghilani wanted to keep Jane Doe on school property and not let her leave. Ghilani’s plan, known as the ‘sting operation,’ was to use Jane Doe as ‘bait’ to lead the school administrators to [the boy] and perhaps other girls.”

According to a court filing submitted by the school district, Dr. Ghilani didn’t believe that the students were in danger or that any safety concerns were present. Instead, he thought students were having consensual sex in school after hours.

He devised a plan to have school police officers follow the students in question to determine who they were and where they were going.

“Security personnel followed the students. Whether the sexual activity was alleged to be consensual or nonconsensual would not have altered the plan,” Upper St. Clair said in its brief. “The plan to was to monitor the students and stop the students before any sexual activity occurred.”

The officers followed the students and believed that they had gone home for the day.

However, an officer working night duty later saw on a school surveillance camera that the boy and another girl were back on the premises.

Though the officer then did rounds to find them, he never did.

The girl’s attorneys contend that two girls were raped in the stairwell that afternoon, including their client.

“Ghilani’s ‘sting operation,’ which prevented von Waldow from placing Jane Doe on her bus and out of harm’s way so that she could be used as bait, resulted in her being violently raped. Ghilani and the school district acted in utter disregard of her welfare.”

Oh boy.

If the allegations against the school district are true, I really can’t imagine a greater breach of student safety and trust. I don’t care how many security officers are following or supposed to be following the students in question — rape victims should never be used as “bait,” let alone as a means to catch students having consensual sex. That this was the plan doesn’t seem to be denied, but instead rather implicitly confirmed through statements by school representatives reproduced up above.

The logic behind the idea is terrifying.  One is left presuming that Principal Ghilani saw Jane Doe’s report of being rape as not falling under the category of “real” rape, and thus related to the consensual sex he was trying to stamp out. It’s an incredibly revealing tactic, as it shows that Ghilani strongly prioritized busting students having consensual sexual contact (in an admittedly inappropriate location) over adequately and responsibly responding to claims of sexual violence. As is so common, consensual female sexuality is seen as a bigger threat to order than male sexual violence.

In its defense, the school district only confirms that this was their line of thinking.¹ Rather than denying that any “sting” was planned at all — apparently, there’s too much evidence that it was real — they’ve just resorted to calling Jane Doe a lying whore:

But in court documents filed by the school district, there are allegations that relationships between the boy in question and several of the girls who claim to be victims were consensual. The district argues that the girls liked him, and were jealous of the others.

In one court filing, the district said that it could dispute whether the student who filed the lawsuit has been raped.

But following the incident, the girl’s attorneys contend in documents, the suspect sent the girl this text message:

“im soo sry i didn’t mean 2 make u cry. i’m cant believe i just raped u well bout time u read dis i mite b dead.”

School officials also claim that they knew nothing of any sexual assaults by the boy until the morning of Feb. 5, 2008 — the day after the alleged “sting.”

So not only did Jane Doe make up both rapes, but the sting operation came about because the principal thought that the student had reported consensual sex to her teacher? Yes, I see how that makes sense. Throw in something about how victims of sexual violence really wanted it and like to fight over their rapist, and no one will notice the illogical nature of the claim! Everyone eats that jealous, boy-obsessed teenage girl shit right up. Also, stuff about how girls and women who claim rape are really just dirty sluts in denial.

I’m honestly not even sure which facet of this case I find most appalling — the lesson that if you report being raped to your school, they’ll use you as a method to catch other students doing allegedly naughty things rather than protecting you; or the lesson that if you report being raped to your school, they’ll respond to their own culpability in the situation by telling the national media that you wanted it, anyway.

I guess that if there’s any “good news” in this case, it’s the fact that we don’t have to choose between condemning the two. The entire story is filled to the brim with victim-blaming, rape apologism, and enabling of sexual violence. And barring an enormous bombshell that the Upper St. Clair School District has in its back pocket, what they’ve admitted to alone shows that they’re responsible for repeatedly and persistently fostering an environment where sexual violence is encouraged, both by placing the situation on the back burner and refusing to listen to rape victims when they come forward.

This image by Jerry Bakewell, available under a Creative Commons Attribution license.

Today is my birthday! And I figured that was the perfect excuse — as if I generally need one — to do a gratuitous Beatles post.

People generally treat the breakup of the Beatles as an incredibly tragic event. There’s no doubt that the way things ended was less than ideal and certainly sad. The fighting, the lawsuits, and the bad blood were all ugly and regretful.

But I am of the unpopular opinion that the Beatles needed to break up. Not only do I think that the end was simply unavoidable, I think that it was also for the best. Like any other band that stays together too long, the group would have eventually become a parody, and started to defile their own legacy. Further, for certain Beatles at least, the breakup was the best thing that ever happened to them, certainly personally if not professionally. George, for example, only really blossomed once he was on his own, writing his best music yet.

In declaring the Beatles’ breakup a tragedy, it’s usually forgotten that albums and albums filled with fantastic music likely would have never been created without it. Songs would have gone unwritten, and more still unrecorded. We can debate all day if the music produced had the Beatles stayed together would have been better than what they put out on their own — but there’s little honest denying that much of what was actually released was absolutely great, particularly in the five years immediately following the breakup, a period from which all but one album on this list is drawn.

It seems that many fans, especially younger ones around my age, don’t even know much about this music existing, let alone its outstanding quality. So I’ve put together a list of what I deem to be the 10 best post-Beatles releases by the solo fab four. With each album, I’ve identified what makes it great, pulled out some key tracks, and posted the video for my personal favorite song from each. Whether you use it to reminisce or inform your own music purchases, enjoy!

1. All Things Must Pass

George Harrison wouldn’t become known as the “Dark Horse” until 1974, but he earned the label all the way back in 1970. The Quiet Beatle had already stunned audiences by contributing two of the finest tracks to 1969′s Abbey Road. Most fans wouldn’t have quite guessed that George had a song like Something in him. But he had that and more — a lot more, actually. Three LPs worth.

All Things Must Pass, George’s first musical statement after the breakup of the Beatles, and his grandest, is a near-perfect masterpiece. Granted, I tend to exclude the third LP Apple Jam from my analysis. A series of instrumental tracks taken from, well, jams, it’s my humble opinion that the disc wasn’t worth the vinyl it was pressed on. The task of a double album is insurmountable enough — after conquering the first two LPs masterfully, you took it a bit too far there, Hari.

But those first two LPs, the ones filled with actual songs, are absolute gold. Opening with the laconic I’d Have You Anytime, segueing into the monster-hit My Sweet Lord, before transitioning into the enormous, epic rocker Wah-Wah, and closing with the also epic, gorgeous Isn’t It a Pity, side one alone is enough to knock you on your ass. But sides two and three impossibly manage to follow that act quite skillfully, and where side four is lacking, it can be forgiven. Where the Beatles’ White Album fails to genuinely be worth two full LPs of new songs, All Things Must Pass succeeds.

Key Tracks: My Sweet Lord, Wah-Wah, Isn’t It a Pity, Run of the Mill, Beware of Darkness, All Things Must Pass

VIDEO: George Harrison’s song Wah Wah plays over an image of Harrison at the Concert for Bangladesh. Wah Wah lyrics.

2. Plastic Ono Band

In 1970, John and Yoko decided to conquer their demons by attending primal scream therapy, which aims to bring painful memories and emotions to the surface as a means to understand and become free of them. While reports on the effectiveness of that second part vary, the therapy certainly worked on the first count, and John’s raw, scarred, angry, and melancholy release Plastic Ono Band was the result.

Featuring Ringo Starr on drums and Klaus Voormann on bass, what Plastic Ono Band sometimes lacks in melody, it more than makes up for in power. From wrenching confessional songs like Mother, to tender, vulnerable songs like Hold On and Love, to politically-tinged rockers like I Found Out and Well, Well, Well, Plastic Ono Band is all John, all the time, and he holds back little. Whether denouncing his own legend in God or declaring his own sense of loneliness in Isolation, it may be his most definitive musical statement.

Key Tracks: Mother, Working Class Hero, Isolation, God

VIDEO: John Lennon’s song Mother plays over the official music video, which features black and white photos from John’s early life, both with and without his parents. Mother lyrics.

3. Band on the Run

Band on the Run is more McCartney than a person could ever ask for, with him playing lead guitar, bass, drums, and a whole lot more. One almost wonders why he bothered bringing (what was left of) his band at all, but never mind — Band on the Run is 70s pop rock heaven, and remains Paul’s most critically acclaimed album to this day for good reason.

The album is made up of smash hit singles — Band on the Run, Jet, Let Me Roll It — that earned every unit they sold, as  well as somewhat more complex and subtle tracks like the transcendent Mamunia and the sweeping Picasso’s Last Words. The uninspired Helen’s Wheels throws a wrench in the works for U.S. fans, but blame it on Capitol — Paul never intended the track as a part of the album, and on the U.K. version, it wasn’t. Band on the Run stands easily as Paul’s solo masterpiece, and easily measures up to anything he did with the Beatles.

Key Tracks: Band on the Run, Jet, Let Me Roll It, Nineteen Hundred and Eighty Five

VIDEO: Paul McCartney and Wing’s Let Me Roll It plays over a semi-recent image of Paul. Let Me Roll It lyrics.

4. Imagine

After the catharsis of Plastic Ono Band, John opted to return to more commercially palatable pursuits. Imagine is no less personal in nature, but is a lot more friendly to the average radio listener’s ears.

Imagine is John’s most remembered album, thanks in large but by no means sole part to the title track, and though it’s not my personal favorite, it’s surely not a bad legacy. Far more than just the album’s iconic namesake, it also includes classics like Jealous Guy and Gimme Some Truth, and polished, tender ballads like How? and Oh My Love. Also in its favor are the work of both Klaus Voormann and the Beatles’ own George Harrison! A part of being John Lennon, I suppose, is getting the best studio musicians.

Key Tracks: Imagine, Jealous Guy, How?, Oh Yoko!

VIDEO: John Lennon’s song Oh Yoko! plays over a slideshow of images of John and Yoko together. Oh Yoko! lyrics.

5. Living in the Material World

For those who don’t share George Harrison’s spiritual devotion, it’s easy to cast a skeptical eye upon Living in the Material World, which is overwhelmingly and overtly about his spiritual life and journey. But as with My Sweet Lord, George Harrison manages to pull off the impossible, writing religious songs that get even non-believers singing along. There’s no risk of anyone being converted by listening to this album, but there is the guarantee that you’ll miss out on an awful lot if you don’t.

Living in the Material World is an album without a single bad track. It features both the grandeur of “big” songs like Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth), Don’t Let Me Wait Too Long, and Living in the Material World, as well as the quiet contemplation of songs like Be Here Now and That Is All. The bitter, pun-filled Sue Me, Sue You Blues is also a riot. Not quite as immediately gratifying as All Things Must Pass, Living in the Material World is a subtler creation that proves to be almost as rewarding.

Key Tracks: Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth), Don’t Let Me Wait Too Long, Living in the Material World, Try Some, Buy Some

VIDEO: George Harrison song Don’t Let Me Wait Too Long plays over still images and video footage of George Harrison playing music live throughout his solo career. Don’t Let Me Wait Too Long lyrics.

6. Brainwashed

By its very nature — a posthumously released album by a Beatle who died too young, lovingly finished by his only son according to the painstaking directions he left behind – Brainwashed gets automatic kid glove treatment. Thankfully, it doesn’t need it. Just as he surely wanted it to be, Brainwashed is another George Harrison masterpiece, the perfect and fitting final note in his musical career.

While such a choice would be easily forgiven, Brainwashed is not a sad album. It’s barely even nostalgic. It is searching, it is thankful, and it is in many places jubilant. At the end, it seems that George was not busy pondering death — tracks like Pisces Fish, Looking For My Life, and Stuck Inside a Cloud show that he was still busy figuring out what to make of life. And if songs like Any Road and Rocking Chair in Hawaii offer any insight, he was not at all sorry to have lived it. Brainwashed is truly among the best in Harrison’s overall superb solo catalog, and I for one am grateful that he decided to get inside the studio one last time.

Key Tracks: Any Road, Pisces Fish, Looking For My Life, Stuck Inside a Cloud

VIDEO: George Harrison song Stuck Inside a Cloud plays over images of George Harrison from the 1980s through to 2001. Stuck Inside a Cloud lyrics.

7. Ram

Paul’s second post-Beatles release is credited to both him and his wife Linda, despite her contributions being limited to co-writing credits on several tracks and backing vocals. Questions of authorship aside, however, it’s a fabulous little album. A bit under-produced and dirty in places, Ram may take a few listens to warm to ears used to McCartney’s usually ubiquitous polish. But the sound of Paul getting back to basics and bring his then-simple, folksy approach to life to his music is an incredibly pleasing one.

The tracks on the album span a wide-range of genres, from rockers like Too Many People and Monkberry Moon Delight, to numerous folk-inspired acoustic numbers like Ram On, Heart of the Country, and Three Legs, and even throws in complex melodies like that on Dear Boy, and eclectic stylistic mashes like The Back Seat of My Car. While initially seeming straight forward, Ram grows in depth and complexity with every listen

Key Tracks: Too Many People, Dear Boy, Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, The Back Seat of My Car

VIDEO: Paul and Linda McCartney’s song Dear Boy plays over images of the LP version of their album Ram. Dear Boy lyrics.

8. Walls and Bridges

For the life of me, I truly cant understand how Walls and Bridges has earned its somewhat bad reputation. Sometime in New York City isn’t exactly my cup of tea. The appeal of Mind Games is mostly lost on me. And Rock and Roll, I’m sorry to say, is just plain bad. But Walls and Bridges is a hidden gem, and quite a lovely one. The first side is pure gold, from Going Down on Love, to Scared. And where the second side drags or confounds (Steel and Glass, Beef Jerky, Ya Ya), all is entirely redeemed by the time that one of Lennon’s most inspired masterpieces, Nobody Loves You (When You’re Down and Out), comes around.

Walls and Bridges was written during John’s “Lost Weekend” separation from Yoko Ono, and reflects his confused and troubled state. The album includes not only What You Got, where John literally pleads with Yoko to “Baby, give me one more chance” and the expression of intense longing and deep love for his wife in Bless You, but also the joyful love song Surprise, Surprise (Sweet Bird of Paradox) for his girlfriend May Pang.

Key Tracks: Old Dirt Road, What You Got, #9 Dream, Nobody Loves You (When You’re Down and Out)

VIDEO: John Lennon’s song Nobody Loves You (When You’re Down and Out) plays over an image of the remastered Walls and Bridges album cover. Nobody Loves You (When You’re Down and Out) lyrics.

9. Goodnight Vienna

Poor Ringo gets no love. But forget all the negative hype you’ve ever heard about his solo career — Goodnight Vienna is a genuinely great album. The 1974 LP is filled with catchy songs, including a title track written by John Lennon, a hit single written by Elton John and Bernie Taupin, and a bunch of great numbers written or co-written by Ringo himself. And let us not forget the infinitely enjoyable No No Song.

As always, Ringo pulls off the up tempo songs the best, but he also manages to work several of the ballads like Call Me and Only You (even if Husbands and Wives and Easy For Me leave a little bit to be desired). Great drums, fun vocals, memorable tunes, and all-star guests like Billy Preston make this Ringo album a must-have, and my personal favorite.

Key Tracks: (It All Comes Da-Da-Down To) Goodnight Vienna, Oo-Wee, Snookeroo, No No Song

VIDEO: Ringo’s song Goodnight Vienna plays over images of Ringo from around the time of recording for the Goodnight Vienna album, as well as images of Ringo doing promotion for the album in his blue spacesuit. Goodnight Vienna lyrics.

10. Ringo

Not being the most prolific writer himself, it wasn’t unusual for Ringo to get through his earliest solo years with a little help from his friends — namely, his fellow ex-Beatles. Ringo was the most successful of his attempts using this strategy, with not only all three other Beatles contributing tracks, but also an enthusiastic critical and commercial response. While I have a minor quibble with the assessment of the LP as Ringo’s personal best (see above), and really loathe the misogynistic track Devil Woman, it certainly is one of Ringo’s finest efforts, and an essential part of any solo Beatles music collection.

Key Tracks: I’m The Greatest, Photograph, You’re Sixteen, Oh My My

VIDEO: Ringo’s song Photograph plays over various photographs of Ringo throughout the years. Photograph lyrics.

Share your own favorite solo Beatles albums in the comments. (I’ll admit that both my Paul and Ringo collections aren’t as complete as I’d like them to be, so I could use the tips!) Or, alternately, share your favorite tracks off of the albums listed in the post.

I’m incredibly pleased to be able to pass along some great news for a change — the Tribal Law and Order Act, which I  had previously urged all of you to support, and which the infinitely awesome Pretty Bird Woman House vocally approves, has passed both houses of Congress and it set to be signed by President Obama today.

A measure designed to ease stubbornly high rates of violent crime, including rape and sexual assault, within Indian reservations will be signed into law by President Obama on Thursday.

Advocates of the Tribal Law and Order Act, which took three years to put together and passed the Senate last week, say it will ensure that more crimes, including murders and serious assaults, are reported and prosecuted amid worries that many cases go unpunished.

The measure gives tribal courts tougher sentencing powers and sets stricter rules to gather and collect more data on crimes. Special U.S. prosecutors will be appointed to tackle what advocates of the law describe as an epidemic of violence.

The president is due to sign the bill into law during a ceremony at the White House on Thursday afternoon.

In the U.S., there is currently an epidemic of sexual violence against Native American women — the rate of rape against Native women is 2.5 that of all other women in the U.S., and more than one in three Native American women will be raped in her lifetime. While some perpetrators are indeed Native themselves, a vast majority of the rapists (86%) are non-Natives, usually white men, who have come onto Native land. Until now, such rapists have often been able to rape with impunity, not only because of the socially marginalized social status of their victims (something rapists tend to seek out), reluctance by victims to report, and poor handling of cases by police — all serious problems and facets of this issue on their own — but also because of confusion and loopholes regarding legal jurisdictions for non-Native perpetrators on Native land.

The Tribal Law and Order Act works to correct several of these problems:

Under the new rules, the Justice Department will have to maintain data on the cases it does not pursue to prosecution. It will also have to share with tribal justice officials any evidence in cases not prosecuted.

The act also aims to clear up jurisdictional loopholes that allow some crimes to slip through the net. It will allow selected tribal police officers to enforce federal laws on Indian lands, whether or not the offender is Indian.

The National Congress of American Indians says it hopes the measure will mean that more sexual assaults carried out on the reservations by non-tribal members will be punished.

Tribal courts will be allowed to sentence offenders to up to three years in prison, increased from the current one-year maximum sentence.

All tribal and federal police officers in the reservations will receive extra training to interview sexual-assault victims and collect evidence from crime scenes.

That the new law will not only provide stronger oversight to U.S. federal handling of sexual violence against Native women, but also strengthens the power of tribal officers and justice systems to enforce the law is absolutely vital, for several reasons. Firstly, victims may simply not believe in U.S. models of justice, holding their faith rather in their tribal systems. Secondly, the U.S. justice system has been known, as has been extensively documented on this very blog, to treat rape victims very, very poorly. The more marginalized a victim is, whether on the basis of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, class, or other identifier, the worse treatment they are likely to receive. Further, the U.S. government has done more harm and violence to Native peoples than can be easily or adequately expressed. It makes sense that rape victims would not trust the U.S. justice system to fairly and reasonably handle their case, and may trust their own tribal systems to treat them better. It also makes sense that victims would not trust the U.S. government to do any harm to them as Native people, and would better trust their own tribal systems to better respect their rights and humanity.

Most importantly, whatever a victim’s reasons and whatever a victim’s inclinations, it’s my understanding that the law will give them something of a choice regarding how to proceed.

The sad news is that while this should be a bill that absolutely everyone who’s not a rapist can get behind, 92 Republicans actually voted against the bill in the House. Interesting that they chose a vote regarding the physical safety of Native women and their ability to find justice for the violent crimes committed against them to make a “statement” about legislative procedures. At least we know where their priorities lie.

Last Friday, Titania Kumeh wrote an excellent blog post at Mother Jones about the International AIDS Conference in Vienna, and the over 100 sex workers and advocates who protested outside. The protest was about how U.S. funding to fight HIV transmission explicitly and deliberately excludes sex workers, even though they are one of the groups most vulnerable to becoming infected and transmitting the virus to others.

The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) requires that funds do not go to sex workers or those who work with sex workers, and has done so for years. In fact, it recently came up in a post that I wrote about police abuse against sex workers in Cambodia. But while the situation is nothing new, it is discussed far too little, and needs to be highlighted whenever an opportunity presents itself. Because it’s killing people.

Back in 2003, Congress mandated that in order for any group or organization to get US global HIV/AIDS funds, it must have “a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.” (See: Sex, American Style). The 2008 PEPFAR fact sheet states “prostitution and sex trafficking are abusive and dehumanizing to women, and they fuel the spread of HIV.” It’s not clear whether former-President Bush—who implemented PEPFAR and its anti-prostitution pledge—recognized the difference between sex trafficking and prostitution, spoke to any sex worker-run organizations that combat exploitation, or spoke to groups that seek HIV preventative care and battle sex trafficking. The anti-sex worker, anti-trafficking pledge left sex worker organizations—which incidentally work with one of the most at-risk populations for HIV (PDF)—out in the cold.

“We need HIV treatment but we don’t need the mandate that sex workers are excluded,” says Pisey Ly of Cambodia’s Women’s Network for Unity (WNU), a sex worker advocate organization. When WNU applied for US HIV prevention funds, it was denied and told to drop its sex worker status, Ly says. It refused. “The original idea behind WNU was to be an independent sex worker organization, to provide sex workers with ownership and leadership to speak about the issues that effect their lives,” Ly says. Because of PEPFAR’s anti-prostitution policy, Ly says, many donors and NGOs that once worked with Cambodian sex workers have abandoned them for fear of losing their US funding.

Meanwhile, unprotected intercourse between sex workers and clients is the main cause of new HIV infections in Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin America, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Really, you should go read the whole post. I wholeheartedly mean that — quoting as much of Kumeh’s text as I would like to would genuinely constitute copyright infringement.

What it comes down to though, is this: U.S. policy is not only failing to help sex workers, it’s actively harming them. Through requiring that any group oppose sex work in order to receiving funding, we’re not just failing to provide funding to those who already didn’t have it and leaving them where they started — though when the situation is so dire, that would be unconscionable on its own. No, we’re ensuring that organizations that previously worked with sex workers and trafficking victims, providing them with information, resources, and care that they needed, no longer will. Because they can’t keep working with sex workers and trafficking victims and afford to stay open.

It’s very similar to the Global Gag Rule. It’s probably just as deadly, if not more so. And it deserves every damn bit as much attention from feminists and other people who care about women’s rights and welfare.

The PEPFAR policy is blatantly misogynistic and sex worker-phobic. It makes sense that organizations should be anti-trafficking in order to receive funds — kidnappers and rapists don’t need anymore money than they already have — but it certainly doesn’t make sense to say that organizations can’t even assist trafficking victims as a part of their work, as such victims are usually among those who most need assistance. To further extend anti-trafficking sentiment to anti-sex worker sentiment is to conflate two issues, and obscure them both. And to deny funding and services to sex workers because they are at particular risk for contracting and transmitting HIV is more than counter-intuitive, it’s downright nonsensical. No — it’s malicious.

I would go so far as to say (and do not doubt that I am not the first) that such a denial of funds constitutes a direct act of violence. With a vast majority of sex workers being women, it constitutes an act of misogynistic, gender-based violence. With sex workers also being disproportionately women of color, trans*, and/or non-straight men,  it further constitutes an act of racist, transphobic, and homophobic violence. And when the U.S. has such great financial power over those who are most vulnerable to it, the label of colonialist violence also applies. We know that when sex workers don’t have access to condoms and information about how HIV is transmitted and prevented, they die. And yet, we continue as though we’re not killing them, or as though their deaths do not matter.

I greatly resent the notion that PEPFAR’s anti-sex work rule has anything to do with “protecting” women. The paternalistic notion that sex work is inherently “dehumanizing to women” isn’t based on a concern for women’s health and well-being. If anyone was concerned about that, the rule wouldn’t exist. The rule is about shaming and punishing those women who step outside of society’s bounds, whether through choice or coercion or force, of what a proper woman acts like. The rule is about appeasing the concerns of religious groups and middle-class moralists and generally taking out society’s hateful, misogynistic disgust at sex workers at those who can be harmed the most. It’s about taking power and abusing it in the worst way possible, just because we can.

Just because we can, and because we can simultaneously tell ourselves that by doing so, we’re doing something good.

And until the rules regarding access to U.S. anti-HIV funding are changed, it’s just yet more blood on the nation’s hands.

h/t @audaciaray

Trigger Warning for descriptions of sexual assault and explicit victim-blaming and sexual assault apologism.

Earlier this week, a jury ruled against a woman who sued the Girls Gone Wild franchise on the grounds that they damaged her reputation when they included footage of her being forcibly disrobed in one of their DVDs (h/t). The woman, identified in the case as Jane Doe, never gave consent for her breasts to be showed on film, audibly refused to lift up her top for cameras, and never signed a consent form. Nevertheless, when another woman came up from behind Doe and suddenly pulled her tank top down — sexually assaulted her — her breasts were exposed and the footage was used.

A St. Louis Circuit Court jury deliberated 90 minutes before ruling against the woman, 26, on the third day of the trial. Lawyers on both sides argued the key issue was consent, with her side saying she absolutely refused to give it and the defense claiming she silently approved by taking part in the party.

The woman, identified in court files as Jane Doe, was 20 when she went to the former Rum Jungle bar in May 2004 and was filmed by a “Girls Gone Wild” video photographer. Now married, the mother of two girls and living in the St. Charles area, Doe sued in 2008 after a friend of her husband’s reported that she was in one of the videos.

“I am stunned that this company can get away with this,” Doe said after the verdict. “Justice has not been served. I just don’t understand. I gave no consent.”

But Patrick O’Brien, the jury foreman, told a reporter later that an 11-member majority decided that Doe had in effect consented by being in the bar and dancing for the photographer. In a trial such as this one, agreement by nine of 12 jurors is enough for a verdict.

“Through her actions, she gave implied consent,” O’Brien said. “She was really playing to the camera. She knew what she was doing.”

There is something gravely, gravely wrong in the U.S. court system when a jury foreman can say that a sexual assault victim “knew what she was doing” and therefore deserved what she got, as a means for deciding how he did in the case.

There is a long, well-documented history of coercion in the making of the Girls Gone Wild films. The women who are featured in the videos are not paid, but rather compensated with tee-shirts. They are plied with drinks by the crews, and then incessantly cajoled and egged on until they do what the cameramen want. Oh, and the company’s sleazy founder Joe Francis has been informally accused of rape. There’s no doubt that some women do actually want and choose to be featured in the films. But their agency and choices don’t erase or excuse Girls Gone Wild’s long track record of gaining “consent” that is not informed, meaningful, or enthusiastic, from women who are known and desired to be in no state of mind to make a decision that very well may stick with them for the rest of their lives.

But that’s not even what we’re talking about here. Girls Gone Wild’s history is relevant, as this case is a part of a long line of purposefully coercive, non-consensual, and potentially illegal behavior. But the issue in Jane Doe’s lawsuit wasn’t the more complex one of whether her consent was meaningful and adequate under the terms it was obtained. The issue is that there was no consent. And Girls Gone Wild knew that, and just didn’t give a shit.

I don’t know the law well enough to know whether or not the jury made the technically correct decision. But I do know that something is seriously wrong here when a woman’s sexual assault is used by a company for profit, without her permission. I do know that something is seriously wrong when “implied consent” — in spite of explicit non-consent, no less — is taken as a valid legal defense. And I do know that something is seriously wrong when a jury decides that a woman who is in public has no legal right to how her body is used by other people.

It’s rare that classic victim-blaming memes are used quite so blatantly and explicitly in court. Usually, lawyers try to be a bit more covert about exactly what kind of prejudices they’re playing into. I feel as though this example is so clear that it hardly needs my parsing, but I’ve been known to overestimate other people’s understanding of rape culture.

When O’Brien despicably said, “She was really playing to the camera. She knew what she was doing,” what he was saying was, “She was being a tease. She totally wanted it. And if she didn’t actually plan to give it up, she deserved to have it taken from her against her will.” What he was saying was, “Look what a slut she was being, dancing in front of our cameras.” What he was saying was, “She’s a slut, and sluts deserve what they get.”

One has to wonder how he sleeps at night. But what went ignored in his argument, and apparently by the rest of the jury, was the simple fact put forth by Doe’s lawyer:

“Other girls said it was OK. Not one other one said, ‘No, no,’” Evans said. “She is entitled to go out with friends and have a good time and not have her top pulled down and get that in a video.”

This truth, that women have a right to be in public without being assaulted and then having their assaults distributed for profit, seems irrefutable to everyone who views women as human beings. But clearly it’s an easy thing to dismiss for Girls Gone Wild and the jury who sided with them. In their eyes, women who leave their homes, who have the audacity to dance for cameras, who “know what they’re doing,” simply cannot be violated, because they have no right to consent or non-consent at all.

Warning: quoted text and linked articles contain transphobic language.

This story is enraging and heartbreaking all at once. A woman named Nikki Araguz recently lost her husband Thomas, when he died while working as a firefighter on July 3. Instead of being allowed to mourn this horrific and sudden loss of her life partner, Nikki is instead being sued by her late husband’s family.

The lawsuit attempts to void the two year marriage of Nikki and Thomas, for the purpose of preventing her from having access to his death benefits. The family brutally alleges that the entire marriage was a fraud, revealed personal details about Nikki’s life, and have dragged her into court and before television cameras during this grieving period.

All because Nikki is transgender.

A Wharton county judge is expected to hear evidence on Friday in the first step toward sorting out the estate of a firefighter killed in the line of duty, in dispute because of a lawsuit between his parents and his widow who was born a male.

Nikki Araguz on Thursday decried allegations lodged in the lawsuit by her late husband’s family that she is a fraud because she was born male.

“I’m absolutely devastated about the loss of my husband, a fallen firefighter named Thomas Araguz III, and horrified at the horrendous allegations accusing me of fraud because they are absolutely not true,” Araguz said at a Thursday press conference. “And that is all I have to say.”

She spoke briefly at the law office of Phyllis Frye, a transgender attorney, who said her six-lawyer firm is poised to fight the family’s lawsuit. Moments after her statement, Araguz stood up in tears and walked out of the press conference.

“She cries,” Frye said after the abrupt departure. “It’s been 18 days since her husband died.”

The Associated Press outlines:

In a lawsuit filed July 12 in Wharton County, his mother, Simona Longoria, asked to be appointed administrator of her son’s estate and that her son’s marriage to Nikki Araguz be voided because the couple were members of the same sex.

…

Voiding the marriage would prevent Araguz from receiving any insurance or death benefits or property the couple had, with these things only going to her husband’s heirs, said Chad Ellis, Longoria’s attorney.

A Friday court hearing is planned to determine whether to extend a temporary restraining order granted Longoria that prevents Araguz from receiving insurance or death benefits or having access to bank accounts or property the couple had.

Ellis said his client’s efforts to void the marriage are supported by Texas law, specifically a 1999 appeals court ruling that stated chromosomes, not genitals, determine gender.

The ruling upheld a lower court’s decision that threw out a wrongful death lawsuit filed by a San Antonio woman, Christie Lee Cavazos Littleton, after her husband’s death. The court said that although Littleton had undergone a sex-change operation, she was actually a man, based on her original birth certificate, and therefore her marriage, as well as her wrongful death claim, was invalid.

“The law is clear, you are what you are born as,” Ellis said.

Let me say, first of all, that when it comes to the issue of marriage, the courts are wrong. Any person should be able to marry any other person of their choosing, regardless of gender. The end. The fact that one cannot is an act of blatant bigotry and discrimination. And that Simona Longoria is attempting to use this prejudiced law to invalidate her son’s marriage, no matter what the circumstances, is utterly despicable.

But it’s all the more despicable that she is attempting to do so here, where the Araguz’s marriage was clearly not same-sex. While in a better world their genders would not matter with regards to such issues, the fact is that their union was between a man and a woman. The only way to counter this objective fact is to invalidate another person’s identity, and to engage in cis supremacist tropes about what it means to “really” be a man or woman.

For her part, it is worth strongly emphasizing, Nikki strongly states that her husband knew about her history, and was fully supportive of her.

But Mrs Araguz said her husband knew everything and even supported her through reconstructive surgery.

“We had a completely honest marriage, a 100 per cent loving, honest marriage,” Mrs Araguz said.

“I am grieving the loss of my husband and best friend.”

She said the couple lied under oath in April during the custody dispute, swearing that Mr Araguz did not know about her gender.

They lied because they thought it would help the child custody arrangements, she said.

For what it’s worth, I absolutely believe her. It also makes absolute sense to lie about Thomas’ knowledge of Nikki’s trans status during a custody hearing, seeing as how prejudices against trans* folks ensure that they are regularly misconstrued as sexual predators and deviants who have no place around children. Social prejudice regularly forces trans* people to lie, whether it be with regards to custody, employment, immigration, or a myriad of other matters. But it’s also worth noting that in what I deem to be the highly unlikely event that her husband did not know of her trans status, there’s also no evidence that Nikki ever lied. She is a woman, and always presented herself as one.

This lawsuit stands for a lot more than the personal family vendetta that it quite clearly appears to be on the surface. It also seeks to invalidate the genders of countless people, the marriages of countless couples. It seeks to reinforce the role of the state in people’s identities, to deliberately perpetuate oppression and uproot people’s lives. Even if Thomas Araguz’s family had reasonable grounds on which to deny his wife access to his death benefits, the grounds of this lawsuit are cruel, bigoted, unethical, and disgraceful. All of it reeks of transphobia, cissexism, and the urge to use one’s access to social power to crush a marginalized person by any means necessary.

There have also been side effects of this decision to sue Nikki Araguz. She has been widely outed as trans, something that will put her at heightened risk of discrimination, harassment, and more direly, violence. The fact is that trans* people are not safe everywhere — indeed, it’s pretty clear that they’re not safe most places. If Nikki wanted to choose to be public about her trans status, that’s entirely her choice — but the decision of Thomas Araguz’s family to make that choice for her is unconscionable.

As a result of the public outing, the name that Nikki was given at birth has been widely published. As in the quotes above, it is stated everywhere you look that she “used to be a man” or “was born a man,” even though there’s absolutely no evidence that she personally identifies this way. The validity of her gender and her marriage and her humanity have been entered into public debate. And she has been mocked and called countless hateful, transphobic slurs — things I will not link to, but which it would not take you long to find for yourself.

All, it bears repeating, in a time where she is trying to mourn the tragic death of the man she loved.

If you are as outraged and stricken by this case as I am, please know that there is a way you can directly help. The TG Center has launched the TG Center Nikki Araguz Fund to pay for her legal defense. Details below:

This is a rare opportunity for each of us to influence the arc of history by donating to the TG Center Nikki Araguz Fund.  Every $1000 donation received puts us one step closer to justice for Nikki.  Individual contributions at any level are appreciated, even those as little as five dollars.  We also encourage you to use your influence to persuade capable people, organizations, and foundations to contribute at higher levels.

Mrs. Araguz is represented by Phyllis Randolph Frye, a longtime supporter and member of the Transgender Foundation of America (TFA) and a transgender pioneer in her own right.  You may drop off or send contributions to the TFA at:

Transgender Foundation of America
604 Pacific
Houston, TX 77006

Make checks payable to Transgender Foundation of America.  Please make sure to note that the payment is for the TG Center Nikki Araguz Fund.

Credit card contributions can be made using the following link:

www.tiny.cc/nikkisfund

Please assist Nikki Araguz’s defense if you can, and be sure to spread this information far and wide.

UPDATE: Ali provides the latest in the comments:

Unfortunately, it looks like the judge is already siding with Mrs. Longoria; he granted her request to freeze NOT JUST insurance payouts but also ALL joint property – including income earned by Mrs. Araguz during the marriage.

http://www.tgctr.org/2010/07/24/nikki_araguz/?awesm=fbshare.me_AQ6Lv

Longoria is quoted as saying her goal is to “freeze Nikki out,” and so far she’s gotten her wish. Mrs. Araguz is currently living off of donations, so ANY amount donated at this point is desperately needed.

Trigger Warning for discussions of sexual violence and police violence, specifically including violence against sex workers and transphobic violence.

Earlier this year, I wrote about an Amnesty International report about sexual violence against women in Cambodia, and the judicial response (or more accurately, lack of judicial response) to sexual violence. A section of that report dealt with sexual violence against sex workers, and the fact that good portion of such violence is actually committed by law enforcement officials.

Now Human Rights Watch has released a more detailed report specifically about police abuses against sex workers in Cambodia, including but not limited to sexual violence. You can view and download the full report here. The Human Rights Watch press release states:

Police arrest sex workers in regular sweeps on the streets and parks of Phnom Penh. Some of the violence is opportunistic, while other abuses commonly occur in periodic crackdowns and raids by police and district authorities, at times targeting sex workers specifically  and other times picking up sex workers along with other groups of marginalized people on the streets.

Police abuse sex workers with impunity. Sex workers told Human Rights Watch that police officers beat them with their fists, sticks, wooden handles, and electric shock batons. In several instances, police officers raped sex workers while they were in police detention. Every sex worker that Human Rights Watch spoke to had to pay bribes or had money stolen from them by police officers.

A 2008 Cambodian law on trafficking and sexual exploitation criminalized all forms of trafficking, including forced labor. Human Rights Watch found that police officers at times can use those sections of the law that criminalize “solicitation” and “procurement” of commercial sex to justify harassment of sex workers. The provisions are also broad enough that they can be used to criminalize advocacy and outreach activities by sex worker groups and those who support them.

Human Rights Watch urged the Cambodian government to consult with sex worker groups, United Nations agencies, and organizations working on human rights, trafficking, and health to review and address the impact on the human rights of those engaged in sex work of provisions in the 2008 law on trafficking and sexual exploitation, before implementing those provisions.

In Phnom Penh, police refer sex workers to the municipal Office of Social Affairs and from there to NGOs or the government Social Affairs center, Prey Speu. Conditions in Prey Speu are abysmal. Sex workers, beggars, drug users, street children, and homeless people held at Prey Speu have reported how staff members at the center have beaten, raped, and mistreated detainees, including children. Local human rights workers, citing eyewitness accounts, allege that at least three people, and possibly more, were beaten to death by guards at Prey Speu between 2006 and 2008.

This is sadly the problem with far too many efforts that purport to be anti-trafficking: they actually don’t work to prevent or address trafficking, but merely serve as a cover to abuse all sex workers and trafficking victims. The stigma, revulsion, and misogyny (combined with many other prejudices) directed at sex workers is enormous. And verbal taunts and harassment easily lead to physical and sexual violence. Dehumanization of sex workers through slut-shaming, classism, transphobia, etc., enforces a culture that turns the other way to such abuses, or actively affirms them. And while not the only perpetrators, law enforcement is always first in line.

That’s why it’s absolutely vital that anti-trafficking efforts actually involve groups made up of trafficking victims and sex workers, to ensure that the law will truly be used to assist those who are victims and not work to create new ones. And it’s also why, as the report addresses (starting on page 60), the U.S.’s inability to do its job as a member of the international community without imposing moralization and anti-sex mandates on other governments is so problematic:

The US is one of Cambodia’s largest bilateral donors, and a major donor supporting antitrafficking efforts in Cambodia. Under the Bush administration, the US government maintained that in order to combat trafficking, countries should take steps against prostitution. National Security Presidential Directive 22 stated that, “Our policy is based on an abolitionist approach to trafficking…. In this regard, the United Statesgovernment opposes prostitution and any related activities including pimping, pandering, and/or maintaining brothels as contributing to the phenomenon of trafficking in persons.”

Since 2003, US legislation dealing with HIV/AIDS and human trafficking has required recipients of international anti-AIDS funding to have a policy “opposing prostitution and sex trafficking” as a condition of receiving funding. The legislation bars the use of funds, to “promote, support, or advocate the legalization or practice of prostitution.” This provision was retained when the law was reauthorized in 2008 and remains in force. In May 2010, the US government issued implementing regulations that largely mirror those imposed by the Bush Administration.

This anti-prostitution stance combined with the impact of the annual US State Department’s Trafficking in Persons report seemed to show US support for the Cambodian government’s efforts to criminalize voluntary sex work.

…

While there is no language concerning criminalizing sex work as a means to combat trafficking in the MOU, US policy on sex work under the Bush administration was quite clear. In supporting these efforts in Cambodia, the US failed to consider the context of a police force long known for its problems with corruption and for committing abuses against sex workers with impunity, when it pushed for the 2008 law [that authorized brothel raids and street sweeps].

Nice job, U.S., nice job.

One critique I had about the Amnesty International report was a failure to take a look at experiences by trans* individuals. The HRW report specifically interviewed multiple trans women sex workers. While the information provided about trans experiences is hardly comprehensive, and while it’s highly unfortunate that HRW seems to take pains to separate out trans women sex workers from “female” sex workers and uses other problematic language, some level of inclusion is both positive and illuminating. In the press release, a woman identified as Neary recounts:

“Three police officers beat me up seriously at Wat Phnom commune police station after I was taken from the park. One of the police officers pointed his gun at my head and pulled the trigger, but the bullet did not fire. They kicked my neck, my waist, and hit my head and my body with a broom stick. It lasted about half an hour. I begged them not to beat me. The police officers were cruel and they did not tell me any reason why they did this to me. “

And in the full report (page 33), she also states:

Sometimes the police say, “A-khtoey [a disparaging word for a transgender person] you fuck up the ass. You have HIV/AIDS and you infect other people. You deserve to be shot.”

Unsurprisingly, wherever there is misogynistic violence, there will also be specifically transmisogynistic violence, and it will always be magnified.

At over 70 pages, the report contains a whole lot more than I’ve highlighted in this brief overview, including many more personal testimonies from sex workers who have experienced abuse by police. I strongly urge you to take some time to browse through it, or at the very least read the full press release, and pass it along.