‘Un-Safe At Home’

*
*

(2019 06 09) Slimand Me (Thassos -February 1973) 50091091_2252905174984063_633501676090687488_n

*
*

I have no control over those ads that appear at this web-site. The sponsored visual presentations are not mine. Thus, I am reluctant to post pictures, memes, or images here at this page, they can become lost amongst the advertising.

Here’s how you can read this Post without unwanted ads: Select All, Copy, then Paste to Notepad or other text application.

*
*

DRAFT … in progress … this can hardly ever be ‘done’

‘Un-Safe at Home’
(6 Jun 2024)

*
*

Dear Reader:

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

I repeated that well-known phrase, I wrote about that at a previous Post.

Here we are again. More information that the USA is an Un-Safe place for Trans and LGBT. Likewise, elsewhere around the world.

I perceive the similarities to the way Hitler moved NAZI Germany during the 1930s and the 1940s, how he infested Europe, such that there was nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. After the War came Liberation, except that Eisenhower ordered the continuing imprisonment and deaths of the Trans and LGBT captives of Hitler’s extermination camps (ah, yes, ‘camps’, such an idyllic concept – we can still hear their laughter and giggling, the prisoners frolicking on the lawn, daily picnics, enjoying sandwiches and fruit drinks, playing games, a jolly good time for all). Eisenhower used his WW2 experience to establish his own Lavender Scare laws in 1953 along the likes of Hitler’s Enabling Acts of 1933.

Eisenhower’s Lavender Scare laws made Trans and LGBT criminal, following the footsteps of Hitler and his Enabling Acts.

Eisenhower declared that Trans and LGBT are a ‘Security Risk’ to the USA, must be denied all Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights, Human Rights.

– No Rights to attend school, get a job.
– No Rights to rent an apartment or buy a home.
– No Rights to be safe from mental cruelty and physical attacks. Social Murder is the phrase. ‘Eradication’ is the act.

Oopsies, my bad, I was listing Hitler’s Three Stages to Genocide:

– You have no Rights.
– You have no Rights to live amongst us.
– You have no Rights to live.

The Republi-con and Christian Con-servative Nationalist ‘Project 2025’ advances that ‘Eradication’ of all Trans and LGBT from the USA. So, you Drumpfian and Deplorable Trans and LGBT, you go right ahead and vote for Crooked Drumpf, vote for Republi-cons, vote for Christian Con-servative Nationalists who demand and declare your Eradication ‘from Day 1’.

If our young people don’t stop threatening to not vote blue – Crooked Drumpf will win and there won’t be a Pride Month month anymore.

Stop gloating as if we won, we’ve won nothing. We are about to lose everything we fought for because young Liberals, Minorities, POC are drifting away from voting Blue because you perceive some non-existent slight, or maybe you don’t like Biden.

There is no third option. Our Constitution only provides the ‘either or’ selection.

So, yeh. Go right ahead, return Crooked Drumpf to the Presidency, and see what that gets you – first in line to the ‘shower’.

Being Trans or LGBT is dangerous throughout the world, sadly, here at home at the USA and at other supposedly ‘civil’ nations. Trans Panic Defence – a legal justification at more than one-half of the states of the USA that anyone can legally murder a Trans person simply because that person is Trans. I can accept and understand the justification behind ‘Punch a NAZI’ – any NAZI is a prospective killer, punching a NAZI is precautionary self defence. But, clearly, Trans is NOT anywhere in that same category as the Hell-bent NAZI.

– Sharon

*
*

Immediate Resources:

(https://www.safehome.org/data-lgbtq-state-safety-rankings/)

2024 LGBTQ+ State Safety Report Cards

Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Delaware all earned A+ grades for LGBTQ+ safety, while South Dakota and Florida scored worst out of all states.

Rob Gabriele
Managing Editor & Home Security Expert
May 29, 2024

Despite years of progress toward inclusion and equality for LGBTQ+ Americans, a sense of safety at home remains elusive for many. By the end of last year, 75 of the 500 anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced across the country in 2023 had become law, and in 2022, hate crimes against LGBTQ+ Americans reached a five-year high.

With hate crimes rising and more anti-LGBTQ+ bills under consideration, it’s essential to monitor the state of safety across the nation regularly. That’s why we’ve created this ranking for the third year. To grade all 50 states and Washington D.C. based on how safe they are for LGBTQ+ people, SafeHome.org’s new scoring system includes both legislative analysis and hate crime data from the FBI. Here are a few of the key takeaways from our study:

Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Delaware all received A+ grades for LGBTQ+ safety based on their comprehensive pro-equality laws and low rates of hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people.
South Dakota, Florida, and Wyoming were the worst states for LGBTQ+ safety in the nation, earning F grades due to their high number of discriminatory laws and hate crime reporting rates. Florida’s ranking changed dramatically since last year when it had the 15th-lowest safety score.
Nearly 50% of states passed new anti-LGBTQ+ legislation in 2023.
Hate crimes targeting LGBTQ+ people rose 10 percent between 2021 and 2022, and hate crimes against transgender people, in particular, surged 40 percent.
59% of LGBTQ+ people say their state’s laws help them feel safer, but 89% say federal action is needed to enshrine protections fully.

LGBTQ+ Safety Grades by State

SafeHome.org’s state ranking is unique from others. We based our grading system on the opinions of 1,000 American LGBTQ+ individuals. Based on their insights, we calculated how heavily different laws would weigh upon each state’s safety score: parenting freedoms, criminal justice rights, non-discrimination rights, youth protections, and health laws. Then, using information from the Human Rights Campaign, we tallied how many laws each state had in the above categories and weighted them based on their perceived impact on LGBTQ+ Americans.

This year, SafeHome.org researchers added a new factor to the safety “report card”: we determined the frequency of hate crimes committed against LGBTQ people in each state according to the latest FBI data.

LGBTQ Safety Grades by State

Based on this new grading method, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Delaware ranked highest for LGBTQ+ safety according to our methodology, while South Dakota, Florida, and Wyoming scored lowest.

The Safest States for LGBTQ+ Americans

1. Rhode Island – Safety Grade: A+ (100)
Rhode Island had the highest safety grade in the nation due to its numerous laws protecting LGBTQ+ rights and its low incidence of hate crimes. It was notably one of only six states where every law enforcement agency reported crime data, and one of seven states that earned an A+, A, or A- in our safety analysis. The Ocean State has some of the most comprehensive laws in the country regarding LGBTQ+ health, safety, and family planning, including:

Foster care non-discrimination laws, which protect LGBTQ+ people wishing to participate in the foster care system as parents
Mandatory reporting of hate crime statistics
Anti-bullying youth laws, with explicit protections for LGBTQ+ youth
Laws that include transgender healthcare in state Medicaid programs
Rhode Island is home to the 12th-highest percentage of same-sex couples and was among the first 15 states to legalize gay marriage, which it did in 2013. Notably, in March 2024, the U.S. Senate appointed Rhode Island’s first openly LGTBQ+ judge to the federal court system.

2. New Hampshire – Safety Grade A+ (98.3)
New Hampshire boasts a wide variety of equality protections in its state laws and has one of the country’s lowest rates of reported hate crimes against LGBTQ+ individuals. New Hampshire scored a bit lower than Rhode Island partly because its laws do not explicitly protect people from discrimination on credit applications based on sexual orientation, and the state does not have a law requiring mandatory reporting of hate crime statistics.

Lawmakers in New Hampshire legalized same-sex marriage in 2010, making it the sixth state in the country to do so. In 2023, New Hampshire passed a bill that explicitly outlawed the use of someone’s sexual identity as a defense in a homicide case. Since 2013, 18 other states have adopted similar resolutions.

3. Delaware – Safety Grade A+ (98.1)
Delaware was one of the earliest states to legalize same-sex marriage in 2013, with the sixth-highest number of same-sex couples (per 1,000 households). The “First State” offers a comprehensive set of LGBTQ-friendly legal protections, including:

Laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity surrounding the use of surrogate mothers
Laws that protect people from conversion therapy
Bans on insurance exclusions for transgender healthcare
These protections, along with Delaware’s extremely low incidence of hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people, make it one of the safest states in 2024.

4. Alaska – Safety Grade A (93.5)
Alaskans elected their state’s first three openly LGBTQ+ legislators in 2022. Although they did not all campaign on LGBTQ+ issues, their presence aligns with their state’s general direction, as indicated by this year’s rankings. All three of these new legislators are sponsors of a bill currently under consideration that would add protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

While Alaska does not have quite as many legal protections for its LGBTQ+ residents as the states ranking above it and has a law that allows for transgender exclusion in sports, it does provide a relatively equal and safe environment. Alaska is also home to the country’s third-highest percentage of same-sex couples who are raising a child.

5. Hawaii – Safety Grade A (92.5)
Hawaii rounds out the top five safest states for LGBTQ+ Americans, thanks to its strong legal protections and low rates of reported hate crimes. Hawaii has a long legacy of being relatively LGBTQ+-friendly; in 1973, it became the sixth state to legalize same-sex sexual activity, and in 1993, it became the first state to formally consider legalizing same-sex marriage.

Hawaii’s LGBTQ+ legal protections include the presumption of a parental relationship for both parents with regard to any children born of that marriage and LGBTQ+ inclusive juvenile justice policies. It is also one of the 26 states that allow name and gender marker updates on both driver’s licenses and birth certificates and one of 19 states that have eliminated the “bias rage or panic defense for criminal acts,” a tactic used to achieve lighter sentencing when an assailant is motivated to violence by learning the victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Worst States for LGBTQ+ Safety

1. South Dakota – Safety Grade F (46.8)
South Dakota has the unfortunate distinction of having the lowest LGBTQ+ safety grade out of all the states. Its legal landscape is more prone to anti-equality than pro-equality, and has a relatively high rate of reported hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people. The few protections South Dakota offers to LGBTQ+ folks include non-discrimination laws regarding admission to colleges and universities, anti-cyberbullying protections, and laws prohibiting discrimination in surrogate parenting.

Anti-equality laws on South Dakota’s books far outweigh their equality-protecting counterparts. The list of such laws includes:

HIV and AIDS criminalization laws
Laws permitting discrimination in adoption and foster placement
Laws restricting transgender people from using gendered facilities in public schools
Bans on gender-affirming care for transgender youth
Likely due to its unsafe atmosphere, the state is home to the second-fewest same-sex couples per capita, ranking in front of only its neighbor, North Dakota. In our previous ranking, South Dakota took the 45th spot on the list of safest states.

Despite the challenging circumstances, LGBTQ+ advocates are making progress in South Dakota. In early 2024, a transgender advocacy group successfully sued the state of South Dakota for discrimination, receiving a $300,000 reward and forcing the state’s governor to issue an apology letter.

2. Florida – Safety Grade F (47.5)
In the second-worst spot for LGBTQ+ safety comes Florida, which has one of the worst legal environments and ranked dead last in participation rates for law enforcement agency crime reporting. Last year, Florida was the 15th worst state in our ranking, but newer and harsher legislation contributed to its plummeting safety score.

In recent years, Florida’s so-called Don’t Say Gay law has received significant media attention, with much scrutiny surrounding its attempts to prevent students and teachers from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity. A settlement reached in early 2024 clarified some of the specifics around the law that was passed in 2022 and remains in place today.

Additional anti-equality legislation on Florida’s books includes sodomy laws and laws that allow or require intentional misgendering of public school students. In 2023, Governor Ron Desantis signed a bill into law that limited drag shows in the state, which a Florida federal judge later blocked.

3. Wyoming – Safety Grade F (53.5)
Wyoming has few pro-equality laws on its books, a relatively high rate of reported hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people, and an overall low rate of crime reporting. All of these factors contribute to its low grade for LGBTQ+ safety, which is significantly worse this year. Last year, Wyoming was the 19th-worst state in the country.

The state has only a few pro-equality laws or policies, such as those guaranteeing equal opportunity in adoption and foster care—but this only applies to sexual orientation and not gender identity. Wyoming also has transgender exclusions in its state Medicaid coverage. Overall, while Wyoming does not have as many anti-equality laws as some of the other states toward the bottom of the safety ranking, its dearth of pro-equality laws contributes to its laggard position.

4. Ohio – Safety Grade F (53.7)
Having passed a bill in 2023 modeled after Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law, drawing condemnation from civil rights groups, it might not be surprising to see Ohio toward the bottom of the LGBTQ+ safety ranking.

The state has one of the highest rates of reported hate crimes against LGBTQ+ individuals in the nation. Like Wyoming, Ohio has very few pro-equality laws on its books, though not so many anti-equality rules. However, the state’s laws include transgender exclusions in Medicaid coverage as well as HIV/AIDS criminalization laws. Since these types of laws regarding healthcare access were among the most important to LGBTQ+ people we surveyed, Ohio’s safety score was deficient.

5. Alabama – Safety Grade F (55.8)
At the fifth-worst spot for LGBTQ+ safety is Alabama, whose especially poor legal environment caused its dismal ranking. In 2024, Alabama considered expanding its own “Don’t Say Gay” law, which prohibits teacher-led discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity in elementary schools, but proposals to widen the scope to older students ultimately did not pass.

Other anti-equality laws on Alabama’s books include:

Bans on gender-affirming care for transgender youth
Religious exemptions for professional training or practice
Laws permitting discrimination in adoption or foster placement
Are More Legal Changes for LGBTQ+ Americans on the Horizon?
So far in 2024, in addition to Florida’s affirmation of its “Don’t Say Gay” policy, a handful of states have restricted or affirmed limitations on listing one’s sex on driver’s licenses using a non-gendered category like “X” rather than “F” or “M.” Gender-affirming care for minors has also been under legislative scrutiny in several states. As of the end of April 2024, however, 20 anti-LGBTQ+ bills had passed at the state level, which would put the pace of enacting such bills below last year’s.

Looking ahead to November’s election, polling from progressive think tank Data for Progress indicates LGBTQ+ Americans prefer Joe Biden and the Democrats over the Republicans and their presumptive nominee, Donald Trump. When he was in office from 2016-2020, Trump ushered in several changes considered to be attacks against LGBTQ+ rights, including rescinding the protection of transgender students, permitting discrimination against LGBTQ+ couples related to adoption, and banning trans military members from actively serving. He reportedly said he would ask Congress to pass a bill establishing that the United States recognizes “only two genders.”

Everyone deserves to feel safe at home, and laws can help ensure personal security for all members of our communities. Substantial progress has been made across the grand arc of history for LGBTQ+ Americans, but as our rankings indicate, there is still far from a consensus view across the United States as to key questions and decisions related to equality under the law. For those who have a choice of where to live, these rankings offer a reference point for finding the safest location.

What is the LGBTQ+ State Safety Ranking?: Our Methodology

The Safety Ranking is based on a composite safety score comprising a law score and a hate crime score.

A “law score” was calculated based on pro- and anti-equality laws in each state. The Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) 2023 State Equality Index State Scorecards show a breakdown of each U.S. state’s pro and anti-equality legislation. We surveyed one thousand people who identified themselves as LGBTQ+ to determine how to weigh each of the legislative categories—parenting laws, hate crimes & criminal justice laws, non-discrimination laws, religious refusal & relationship recognition, youth laws, and health & safety laws. We calculated their law scores by adding up the legislation in each state and weighing them according to our survey. This survey was conducted in 2023.

Though we based the scores on more detailed questions in each category, we asked LGBTQ+ Americans generally about laws that promote equality and ones that damage it:

Which type of laws promoting equality are most important for your safety? Percent of respondents

Non-Discrimination laws that forbid discrimination in employment, housing, etc. 49%
Health & Safety laws that uphold the rights of LGBTQ+ people to receive healthcare, insurance, etc 22%
Youth Laws that protect LGBTQ children through anti-bullying measures, bans on conversion therapy, and sex education 13%
Criminal Justice laws that require mandatory reporting of hate crimes, eliminate bias rage or panic defense for criminal acts, prevent police profiling 10%
Parenting laws that legally recognize same-sex marriage and parenthood in various scenarios 3%

Which type of anti-equality laws are most damaging to your safety? Percent of respondents

Health & Safety laws allowing discrimination in healthcare 40%
Youth laws that restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ youth 21%
Criminal Justice laws that criminalize HIV/AIDS nondisclosure, consensual sexual activity, etc) 17%
Limits on Non-Discrimination laws 14%
Parenting laws limiting the ability of LGBTQ+ people in adoption, fostering, etc 3%
Religious Refusal laws that permit the denial of services or employment to LGBTQ+ people based on religious belief 3%

A “hate crime score” was also calculated based on an analysis of the incidence of hate crimes against any group falling within the LGBTQ+ umbrella. The 2022 FBI Uniform Crime Report’s Hate Crime Statistics Collection was used to count the number of relevant incidents in each state and divide them based on whether they happened in a rural or urban area. Note that the reported incidence of hate crimes versus the actual incidence rate may vary by relevant agency and, therefore, may not be a perfect representation of the actual hate crime landscape. Not every law enforcement agency in each state reported hate crime incidents to the FBI, which also factored into each state’s score.

We then calculated the number of rural incidents per 100k rural population and the number of urban incidents per 100k urban population. We then weighed those incident rates based on the percentage of the state’s populations that lived in rural and urban areas (e.g., urban incidents will be weighted higher in states with a higher proportion of their population living in urban areas), as well as the percentage of law enforcement agencies reporting data to the FBI in each state.

The hate crime score was normalized to the same scale as the law score, then multiplied by the percent of agencies in the state that contributed data to the FBI, penalizing states with low participation. The final LGBTQ+ safety score for each state is the average of these law and hate crime scores, and we assigned letter grades on a logarithmic scale to facilitate understanding of how well each state scored.

(https://www.huffpost.com/entry/new-apostolic-reformation-splc-hate-report-christian-nationalism_n_665f6fdae4b08e32183f25a8)

Alarming Report Warns Of ‘Greatest Threat To American Democracy You’ve Never Heard Of’
An annual report from the Southern Poverty Law Center describes a burgeoning new form of Christian supremacy sweeping the country.
Christopher Mathias
Jun 4, 2024, 06:18 PM EDT
Updated Jun 4, 2024

A growing Christian supremacist movement that labels its perceived enemies as “demonic” and enjoys close ties to major Republican figures is “the greatest threat to American democracy you’ve never heard of,” according to a new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The SPLC, a civil rights organization that monitors extremist groups, released its “Year In Hate And Extremism 2023” report on Tuesday. A significant portion of the report, which tracked burgeoning anti-democratic and neo-fascist movements and actors across America, is devoted to the New Apostolic Reformation, “a new and powerful Christian supremacy movement that is attempting to transform culture and politics in the U.S. and countries across the world into a grim authoritarianism.”

Emerging out of the charismatic evangelical tradition, the NAR adheres to a form of Christian dominionism, meaning its parishioners believe it’s their divine duty to seize control of every political and cultural institution in America, transforming them according to a fundamentalist interpretation of scripture.

NAR adherents also believe in the existence of modern-day “apostles” and “prophets” — church leaders endowed by God with supernatural abilities, including the power to heal. In 2022, a handful of these “apostles,” the report notes, issued what they called the Watchman Decree, an anti-democratic document envisioning the end of a pluralistic society in America.

The apostles claimed they had been given “legal power and authority from Heaven” and are “God’s ambassadors and spokespeople over the earth,” who “are equipped and delegated by Him to destroy every attempted advance of the enemy.”

And who’s the enemy? Basically anyone who does not adhere to NAR beliefs. NAR adherents see their critics as being literally controlled by the devil.

“There are claims that whole neighborhoods, cities, even nations are under the sway of the demonic,” the report states. “Other religions, such as Islam, are also said to be demonically influenced. One cannot compromise with evil, and so if Democrats, liberals, LGBTQ+ people, and others are seen as demonic, political compromise — the heart of democratic life — becomes difficult if not impossible.”

This rhetoric has become increasingly widespread among Republican lawmakers, including former President Donald Trump, who last year referred to Marxists and atheists as “evil demonic forces that want to destroy our country.”

That Trump would use NAR-inspired rhetoric is unsurprising considering his relationship with Paula White-Cain, an NAR figure who delivered the invocation at Trump’s inauguration in 2017 and at the kickoff of his 2020 reelection campaign, as noted by Paul Rosenberg in Salon. White-Cain also delivered the invocation at Trump’s Jan. 6, 2021, “Stop the Steal” rally in Washington, D.C. — the event that eventually became the insurrection at the Capitol.

The attack on the Capitol was largely inspired, the report suggests, by NAR’s theology of dominionism. “NAR prayer groups were mobilized at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as well as supporting prayer teams all over the country, to exorcise the demonic influence over the Capitol that adherents said was keeping Trump from his rightful, prophesized second term,” the report states.

Major Republican figures took part in such events on or around the day of the attack. Mike Johnson, who is now the speaker of the House, joined the NAR’s “Global Prayer for Election Integrity,” which called for Trump’s reinstatement as president, in the weeks leading up to the attack on the Capitol. Johnson has also stated that Jim Garlow, an NAR leader, has had a “profound influence” on his life.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has ties to the extremist New Apostolic Reformation movement. ANADOLU VIA GETTY IMAGES

Ultimately, the SPLC report is an attempt to ring the alarm bells about the NAR, ”the greatest threat to U.S. democracy that you have never heard of.

“It is already a powerful, wealthy and influential movement and composes a highly influential block of one of the two main political parties in the country,” the report continues. “So few people have heard of NAR that it is possible that, without resistance in our local communities, dominionism might win without ever having been truly opposed.”

The SPLC’s report, according to a press release, also documents 595 hate groups and 835 antigovernment extremist groups in America, “including a growing wave of white nationalism increasingly motivated by theocratic beliefs and conspiracy theories.”

“With a historic election just months away, this year, more than any other, we must act to preserve our democracy,” Margaret Huang, president and CEO of the Southern Poverty Law Center and SPLC Action Fund, said in a statement. “That will require us to directly address the danger of hate and extremism from our schools to our statehouses. Our report exposes these far-right extremists and serves as a tool for advocates and communities working to counter disinformation, false conspiracies and threats to voters and election workers.”

RELATED
CHRISTIANITY
EXTREMISM
MIKE JOHNSON

Republicans Join Trump’s Attacks On Justice System And Campaign Of Vengeance After Guilty Verdict
‘Stand Back And Stand By’: Matt Gaetz Parrots Trump’s Call To Violent Extremists At His Trial
Felony Charges Filed Against Attorneys, Aide Who Worked For Trump During 2020 Campaign In Wisconsin

VIEW 949 COMMENTS

FROM OUR PARTNER

HuffPost US Politics
Twitter Erupts After Melania Trump Vows To ‘Continue’ Fighting For Children Everywhere

HuffPost US Politics
Joe Scarborough Loses It Over Clip Of Trump Talking About Relationship With God

Part of HuffPost Politics. ©2024 BuzzFeed, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Huffington Post

Go figure.

The Bell Curve average of about one-third of the Trans and LGBT Community still support Drumpf, Republi-cons, Christian Con-servatives eager to deny Constitutional Rights, Human Rights, for themselves. They knowingly vote for Drumpf and Republi-cons who pass anti-Trans and anti-LGBT legislation.

– Sharon

(https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lgbtq-students-school-dress-codes_n_665f6057e4b022af97ddfbb9)

School Officials Are Using Dress Codes To Target LGBTQ Students
As a record number of anti-LGBTQ state bills are introduced across the country, school districts are following suit with their own restrictive policies.
Lil Kalish
Jun 4, 2024, 05:38 PM EDT

Schools across the country have denied students entry to prom, graduation ceremonies and other school activities because of dress code policies that advocates say disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ students and girls.

In May, 16-year-old Florida junior Sophie Savidge told NBC News that she wasn’t allowed to go to prom because she wore a suit. In a statement at the time, the school pointed to its online guide to attire, which stipulates that “ladies” are required to wear dresses and “one piece attire only” to formal events.

A transgender student in Alabama reportedly wasn’t allowed to go to her senior prom in April because she wore a dress. The school’s student handbook said that it was up to administrators to “deem appropriate clothing or appearance,” according to AL.com.

And the American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi filed a federal complaint with the Department of Education against Harrison County School District for barring a transgender girl from wearing a dress to her regional band concert this spring. The complaint detailed a two-year pattern of the district punishing girls — transgender and cisgender alike — for violating dress codes requiring students to dress in clothes that are “consistent with their biological sex.”

The school district added the provision of “biological sex” to its dress code after LGBTQ+ students complained that they couldn’t wear clothes that expressed their gender identity, said Liza Davis, a fellow at the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project.

School administrators have long used dress codes to enforce a rigid gender binary and uphold different standards based on assigned sex. This year, there has been a renewed effort in school districts across GOP-led states to enforce policies that are more explicitly restrictive to queer, trans and gender nonconforming students, as a record number of anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced in statehouses across the country.

“Requiring students to dress according to their biological sex — even if it seems to be neutral as a rule, and it’s not calling out any particular student — has a disproportionate impact on gender nonconforming, nonbinary and transgender students because it is tying gender expression to their sex assigned at birth, essentially,” Davis said.

Students who are targeted over dress code infractions can lose out on class time or face punishments like suspension, and may face emotional distress from being pulled from class and told to change, she said.

Sex-based dress codes often force boys to wear pants and girls to wear skirts or dresses of a certain length. Advocates say these rules push rigid gender stereotypes and outdated, misogynistic ideas of how girls should dress in the presence of boys. And they leave no room for less traditional gender expression.

School dress codes that rely so heavily on “biological sex” are reminiscent of anti-LGBTQ bills and policies across the country.

“The district’s discriminatory dress code policies and enforcement are part of a wider sex-based hostile environment, which has impacted our clients and other students,” Davis said, referring to the complaint in Mississippi.

Policies that purport to bring “clarity” to sex discrimination laws by codifying definitions of “male” and “female” in order to exclude trans people from those categories often use exceedingly specific language that also fails to account for intersex people. The language embedded in these policies, often called “Women’s Bill of Rights” bills, was first proposed by Independent Women’s Voice, a conservative organization that has argued it’s necessary to protect women-only spaces and activities from trans people’s inclusion.

So far this year, at least 10 states have introduced or passed similarly worded legislation to narrowly define “biological sex” based on a person’s reproductive capacity or chromosomes. Oklahoma’s governor just signed the state’s own version of a Women’s Bill of Rights into law on Monday. Last year, Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) introduced a Women’s Bill of Rights resolution to Congress, though it’s made no progress since.

Some state-level legislation now includes definitions of sex that explicitly bar trans people from updating their drivers licenses or state IDs, which makes it harder to vote, travel, and exist in public life.

Advocates say that an emphasis on “biological sex” has negative ramifications for all people, including cisgender women, because it encourages people to police one another’s gender — including kids. People have harassed child athletes who they suspect are transgender, and one state official in Utah came under fire for falsely suggesting that a student was transgender because of how she looked.

Sex and gender researchers previously told HuffPost that binary definitions of sex do not reflect how scientists currently understand human sex, which is determined by a variety of biological phenomena including hormones, genitals and otter secondary sex characteristics.

As more and more anti-LGBTQ legislation specifies how LGBTQ+ students can and cannot express themselves and participate in school activities, Davis said she would not be surprised if we see more schools across the country adopt policies that have explicit “biological sex provisions.”

Those kinds of provisions are likely to violate Title IX, a 1972 federal law that protects against discrimination on the basis of sex in public schools and colleges, Davis said.

The Biden administration released long-awaited final guidance for Title IX this spring, expanding the definition of sex discrimination to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Since then, more than a dozen red states have sued the Department of Education and vowed to not comply with this updated interpretation.

Many protections for LGBTQ students now hang in the balance. Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has vowed to overturn Title IX and restrict Title VII, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, on day one of his second term if elected.

“The country has to decide. Do we want to live in a place that looks like some of the most regressive politics in the states where right wing elected officials have control over everything: the way you dress, how you identify, the name and pronoun you use, what bathroom you’re able to access?” Brandon Wolf, press secretary at the Human Rights Campaign, told HuffPost earlier this spring. “Or do we want to live in a country… where we have the freedom to be ourselves, we have the freedom to make decisions about our own bodies?”

It’s Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help

The 2024 election is heating up, and women’s rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America’s future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?

HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.

RELATED
LGBTQ
TRANSGENDER
DRESS CODE
K-12 EDUCATION
POLITICS

ACLU Says Mississippi School District’s Dress Code Violates Title IX And Discriminates Against Transgender Students
These Paid ‘Experts’ Are Crisscrossing The Country To Defend Anti-Trans Laws
Mississippi Governor Signs Transgender Bathroom Ban In Public Schools
GO TO HOMEPAGE

Latest News

Jamie Lee Curtis (left) officiate her daughter Ruby (right) and partner Kynthia’s (centre) wedding. (Getty)
Celebrity
May 31
Jamie Lee Curtis marks second anniversary of her trans daughter’s wedding: ‘Wife is sweet!’

Dylan Mulvaney has spoken out since Republican Rick Clark Becker paid for the Cameo. (Getty)
Trans
May 31
Dylan Mulvaney speaks out after Republican paid her to unknowingly mock opponent

The comedian is set to head up the next series. (Getty)
TV
May 31
Lesbian comedian Rosie Jones joins Taskmaster season 18 as the lineup is confirmed

The former president has been found guilty of all counts. (Getty)
News
May 31
Donald Trump found guilty of all counts in ‘hush money’ trial

Sylvia Rivera with a Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries banner.
History
May 30
‘What the f**k’s wrong with you all?’ Sylvia Rivera’s fiery 1973 Pride speech still resonates today

Girlfriend of Lyra McKee on ‘bittersweet’ same-sex marriage milestone
UK
May 30
Three men on trial for murder of LGBTQ+ journalist Lyra McKee

a carabiner with keys hanging from a belt buckle and a woman in a car holding up her carabiner with the text ‘no one will know you’re a lesbian’ above.
Lesbian
May 30
Why do lesbians wear carabiners? The humble accessory’s symbolism and history explained

Bruno Tonioli
Celebrity
May 30
Who is Britain’s Got Talent judge Bruno Tonioli’s mysterious younger partner Jason Schanne?

Gay Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Politics
May 30
Gay MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle ‘gutted’ after being suspended by Labour over complaint

A picture of Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer photoshopped across a red and blue background.
Politics
May 29
Only Starmer and Sunak to appear in first UK general election TV debate as smaller parties snubbed

Iain Dale
News
May 29
Gay LBC host Iain Dale quits job to attempt to stand in general election

Composite image of some of the UK’s party leaders, including: Keir Starmer of Labour, Rishi Sunak of the Conservatives, Ed Davey of the Lib Dems, Carla Denyer of Greens, and Richard Tice of Reform UK
UK
May 28
Where do the UK’s political parties stand on self-ID for trans people?

An edited image of four MPs, Mhairi Black, Ben Bradshaw, Jamie Wallis, and Angela Crawley, infront of a rainbow gradient overlayed with a road map.
Politics
May 28
All the LGBTQ+ MPs standing down at the 2024 general election

Rishi Sunak filtered in blue, and Keir Starmer filtered in red, stare at each other.
Politics
May 22
Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak’s views on trans rights: What’s the difference?

UK
May 27
LGBTQ+ people are taking the p**s out of the Tories’ National Service pledge – 11 of the best memes

Rosie Duffield against a pink background with one of her infamous anti-trans tweets
Politics
May 28
Rosie Duffield: What has the Labour MP said about trans people and trans rights?

An edited image of Keir Starmer infront of a pink and blue background.
Video
May 24
Can Labour’s Keir Starmer be trusted on trans rights?

A Green Party candidate next to a polling sign
Politics
May 23
Where does the Green Party stand on trans rights?

PinkNewsInform, Inspire, Empower

(https://www.propublica.org/article/ken-paxton-consumer-protection-laws-political-targets)

(https://truthout.org/articles/texas-ag-uses-consumer-protection-laws-to-pursue-his-political-targets/)

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, right, is using consumer protection laws to target organizations like Annunciation House, run by Ruben Garcia, left, whose work conflicts with Paxton’s political views. Credit:Photo illustration by ProPublica. Source photos: Ivan Pierre Aguirre for The Texas Tribune, Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune.

Politics

Texas’ Attorney General Is Increasingly Using Consumer Protection Laws to Pursue Political Targets
by Vianna Davila
May 30, 5 a.m. CDT

Ken Paxton has repeatedly used laws that are supposed to protect people from fraudulent or deceptive practices to pursue entities he disagrees with politically, including hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and LGBTQ+ groups.

Twitter
Facebook

(https://www.propublica.org/article/ken-paxton-consumer-protection-laws-political-targets)

Co-published with The Texas Tribune
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

This article is co-published with The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan local newsroom that informs and engages with Texans. Sign up for The Brief Weekly to get up to speed on their essential coverage of Texas issues.

The men knocked on the door of a two-story, red-brick building in downtown El Paso one chilly morning in February. When a volunteer answered, they handed her a document they said gave them the right to go inside and review records kept by Annunciation House, a nonprofit that for decades has served immigrants and refugees seeking shelter.

An employee phoned Ruben Garcia, the nonprofit’s director and founder, who was at one of the organization’s other properties. Feeling a calling to do more to help immigrants and other people experiencing poverty, Garcia was part of a small group that formed the nonprofit in the 1970s. He’s since become an unofficial historian of the migration patterns and political response to immigration and immigrants.

But in his nearly five decades helming the nonprofit, Garcia had never encountered a situation like this. Standing on the organization’s doorstep were officials sent there by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Consumer Protection Division. They were demanding to come inside and search the nonprofit’s records, including all logs identifying immigrants who received services at Annunciation House going back more than two years.

“Is this a warrant?” Garcia recalls asking the group, which included an assistant attorney general and a law enforcement officer from the state agency.

It wasn’t. Still, the letter the men presented stated that the attorney general’s office had the power to immediately enter the building without one.

Consumer protection laws give attorneys general broad legal authority to request a wide range of records when investigating businesses or charities for allegations of deceptive or fraudulent practices, such as gas stations that hike up fuel prices during hurricanes, companies that run robocalling phone scams and unscrupulous contractors who take advantage of homeowners.

But attorneys general have increasingly used their powers to also pursue investigations targeting organizations whose work conflicts with their political views. And Paxton, a Republican, is among the most aggressive. “He’s laying out kind of like the blueprint about how to do this,” said Paul Nolette, an expert in attorneys general and director of the Les Aspin Center for Government at Marquette University.

An analysis by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune shows that in the past two years, Paxton has used consumer protection law more than a dozen times to investigate a range of entities for activities like offering shelter to immigrants, providing health care to transgender teens or trying to foster a diverse workplace.

Not a single one of the investigations was prompted by a consumer complaint, Paxton’s office confirmed. A complaint is not necessary to launch a probe.

The analysis is possibly an undercount. The attorney general’s office said it has not consistently maintained a list of the Consumer Protection Division’s demands to examine records and would need to review individual case files to determine how many requests had been sent. The agency also fought the release of certain records requested under Texas’ Public Information Act, citing exceptions for anticipated litigation.

Paxton’s office did not respond to requests for comment or to detailed questions. It also did not reply to a request to speak with the Consumer Protection Division’s chief.

Two attorneys representing nonprofits that Paxton recently targeted said they believe he launched the investigations simply to harass their clients and to cause a chilling effect among organizations doing similar work. Both said the attorney general’s demands violate the First Amendment, which guarantees the right to free speech, association and religion, and the Fourth Amendment, which offers protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

The political weaponization of consumer protection divisions by Paxton and other attorneys general appears to be “a core violation” of constitutional laws that runs counter to what these divisions were established to do, said Georgetown Law professor Michele Goodwin.

The offices were intended to protect the public, Goodwin said. “Instead,” she added, “what is taking place in these times are efforts that undermine the civil liberties and the civil rights of people who are the public in those states and the people who are in those states who are seeking to aid and assist the public.”

Ken Paxton Has Used Consumer Protection Law to Target These Organizations

In the Annunciation House case, the attorney general’s office went even further by showing up at the nonprofit’s door and demanding to immediately review documents rather than sending its requests for records by mail and giving organizations weeks to respond, as it often has in other cases ProPublica and the Tribune examined.

Paxton’s office then denied the nonprofit’s request for additional time to determine what information it was legally required to turn over, prompting Annunciation House to sue. In response, the attorney general’s office argued in court documents that the nonprofit had forfeited its right to operate and publicly accused it of acting as a stash house for immigrants he alleges are in the country illegally.

The attorney general’s move to shutter Annunciation House drew swift rebuke from political and religious leaders, who said his characterizations of the nonprofit were a dangerous misrepresentation of the charity. Paxton’s actions also sparked concern as far away as the Vatican. In a recent interview with CBS News, Pope Francis called Paxton’s efforts “madness, sheer madness.”

“The migrant has to be received,” the pope said on the television news program “60 Minutes.” “Thereafter you see how you’re going to deal with them. Maybe you have to send them back. I don’t know. But each case ought to be considered humanely, right?”

Annunciation House primarily serves people who are processed and released into the U.S. by immigration officials. Garcia communicates daily with Border Patrol and other federal agencies that regularly ask for help finding shelter for people who turn themselves in to authorities or are apprehended but have nowhere to go while their cases are processed.

In March, an El Paso state district judge temporarily blocked the attorney general’s efforts to obtain Annunciation House’s records and said the state must go through the court system to continue the investigation. “There is a real and credible concern that the attempt to prevent Annunciation House from conducting business in Texas was predetermined,” the judge wrote in his order.

Even when Paxton doesn’t get speedy access to the documents he wants, he often publicizes these typically confidential cases, putting out news releases that draw headlines and build support among his base of hard-line conservatives.

The simple act of publicizing that he is pursuing an organization can cause irreparable harm, said Jerome Wesevich, an attorney who represents Annunciation House.

“Someone has to say what is the line between a legitimate investigation and harassment,” Wesevich said.

As the Annunciation House case progresses through the courts, Paxton has continued his public attacks on the nonprofit. On May 8, Paxton announced in a press release that he had filed a court injunction to stop what he called Annunciation House’s “systemic criminal conduct.” He then issued a warning to other nonprofits that assist immigrants, saying that those that are “complicit in Joe Biden’s illegal immigration catastrophe and think they are above the law should consider themselves on notice.”

He again called for the charity to be shut down.

Evolving Power

The consumer protection cases that Paxton and like-minded attorneys general are pursuing today are virtually unrecognizable from the historically bipartisan and apolitical ones their counterparts undertook even 20 or 30 years ago, said James Tierney, a former Maine attorney general.

“The people that the laws were designed for were working-class people who were getting ripped off when they bought a used car,” said Tierney, who directs the attorney general clinic at Harvard Law School. While many attorneys general still do that work, consumer protection laws are also increasingly “being used to obviously move social agendas.”

The push to protect consumers was among numerous social movements that began to materialize in the 1960s and 1970s as Americans demanded more government action in areas like civil rights and environmental justice. As a result, states began to adopt laws that gave attorneys general the ability to investigate potential fraudulent activity by businesses.

Federal and state institutions also started encouraging attorneys general to think of themselves as representing not only the state but also the people who lived there. “This shift was significant because by serving as the representatives of individuals and groups allegedly harmed by corporate conduct, AGs essentially became a form of class-action litigator,” Nolette, the Marquette professor, wrote in his book, “Federalism on Trial.”

Initially, attorneys general focused consumer protection investigations in their own states. By the 1980s, however, the scope of the investigations began to change as the attorneys general offices started to work across state lines to target large industries.

Perhaps the most notable example is the decision by all 50 state attorneys general to sue tobacco companies in the 1990s. They successfully argued the industry misled consumers about the dangers of cigarettes and other tobacco products and intentionally marketed them to children. The lawsuits resulted in billions of dollars in settlement money. More recently, attorneys general across the country pursued similar multistate suits against the opioid industry and pharmaceutical supply chain.

The power of attorneys general continued to grow through the decades as Congress passed measures that empowered states to enforce federal law and the courts interpreted ambiguities in the law in such a way that made it easier for states to sue under federal statutes.

A number of other court decisions unrelated to consumer protection further changed the role of attorneys general. As states found it easier to bring cases that are similar to class-action suits, the Supreme Court issued rulings in the early 2010s that made it harder for private litigants to do so. The decisions essentially drove those cases to attorneys general, Tierney said.

A 2014 Supreme Court decision that lifted limits on individual campaign contributions raised the stakes of attorneys general campaigns and created “a funnel for dark money to flow into every AG race,” Tierney said.

“The machine is up and running,” Tierney said, “and will continue to run unless someone figures out how to stop it.”

Stretching the Boundaries

Although Paxton has used consumer protection law to investigate a wide range of organizations with which he disagrees politically, he has perhaps most aggressively pursued those that provide or support gender-affirming care for minors.

Over the past two years, his office has launched at least six investigations into hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and an LGBTQ+ advocacy and support group, often demanding records that include sensitive patient information.

These investigations came amid a growing wave of conservative initiatives in Texas and across the country that have worked to chip away at the rights of transgender people. At least 25 states ban gender-affirming care for minors in some way, according to the Human Rights Campaign.

Texas was not among those states when, in August 2021, then-state Rep. Matt Krause, a Republican who the same year launched an investigation into school library books that dealt with topics like sexuality and race, wrote to Paxton asking for an opinion on whether gender-affirming care for children amounted to child abuse. In February 2022, Paxton issued a nonbinding legal opinion that said it did.

Days later, Gov. Greg Abbott directed the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate parents who authorized such treatment for their children, a move that spurred both condemnation — including from families, medical professionals and the White House — and fear across the state and country. These investigations are on hold following several court rulings.

As Abbott ordered the state agency to go after parents, Paxton began launching investigations into organizations that provide or support gender-affirming care for transgender minors.

One of those targeted entities was Dell Children’s Medical Center in Austin. In May 2023, one of Paxton’s Consumer Protection lawyers sent a letter to the hospital demanding documents related to the use of puberty blockers and counseling for transgender youth. Three weeks later, the same lawyer sent a letter seeking similar records from Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston. In a news release announcing the investigation, Paxton said his office was examining whether the facility was “unlawfully” providing gender transition care.

At the time that the letters were sent to the hospitals, a law preventing transgender minors from getting puberty blockers and hormone therapies was working its way through the Legislature. The law ultimately passed, but it did not go into effect until Sept. 1.

Dell Children’s did not respond to an interview request. Texas Children’s Hospital declined to comment for this story.

In the months that followed, Paxton went even further. He began to investigate organizations outside of Texas for their connections to gender-affirming care: Seattle Children’s Hospital in Washington state; QueerMed, a telehealth clinic based in Georgia; and PFLAG Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based national nonprofit that supports LGBTQ+ people and their families.

Seattle Children’s Hospital sued the attorney general in December to block the release of any patient records, arguing that handing them over would violate federal and state health care privacy laws. The hospital said in legal filings it had no staff that treated transgender children in Texas or remotely.

Paxton has not answered questions about why he decided to investigate out-of-state facilities, but in court filings in the Seattle case, the attorney general’s office argued it has the right to investigate the hospital and other organizations registered to do business in Texas. The demand letter sent to the hospital asked for records related to the facility’s gender-affirming treatment of children who reside or used to reside in Texas. (The news organizations filed a public information request for the investigative letter Paxton sent to QueerMed, but the attorney general’s office is fighting its release, citing exceptions when information is related to pending or anticipated litigation.)

What seems to unite all three cases is that the attorney general’s office under Paxton “is going to use consumer protection law to stretch the boundaries of what they can do to try to make transgender care as minimal as possible in Texas,” said Colin Provost, an associate professor of public policy at University College London whose research has included how attorneys general in the U.S. work together to enforce consumer protection laws.

Paxton and Seattle Children’s reached a settlement in April. As part of the deal, the hospital agreed to withdraw its Texas business license. In exchange, Paxton dropped his demand for records.

QueerMed founder Dr. Izzy Lowell declined to comment for this story. But the doctor said in an interview with The Washington Post that Paxton’s push to access transgender youths’ medical records was “a clear attempt to intimidate providers of gender-affirming care and parents and families that seek that care outside of Texas and other states with bans.”

PFLAG sued Paxton’s office in February after the attorney general demanded its records. In court filings, Paxton alleged that the nonprofit had information about medical providers in the state that may have been committing insurance fraud. The attorney general accused health care professionals of providing gender-affirming care but disguising it as treatment for an endocrine disorder.

A Travis County district court judge issued an injunction in March that temporarily blocked the state’s access to the records. In her ruling, she wrote that failing to stop the attorney general from getting these records could result in PFLAG and its members suffering harm, including limitations on their First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights. Paxton appealed her ruling. The 3rd Court of Appeals, which is hearing the case, has issued a temporary order protecting PFLAG from Paxton’s demands for records.

Karen Loewy, a lawyer with Lambda Legal, which is representing PFLAG, said she remains baffled by the attorney general’s decision to use the state’s consumer protection law to investigate organizations like PFLAG, which provides resources to chapter support groups in the state.

“There’s no consumer fraud happening here at PFLAG’s hands,” Loewy said.

Yet, she said, the attorney general appears to believe that he can send these demands to anyone his office thinks has information related to an investigation. In a court filing in response to PFLAG’s lawsuit, Paxton’s office admitted it does not believe the nonprofit is violating the state’s consumer protection law, known as the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The attorney general, however, argued in the filing that it can demand records of anyone, “not just those suspected of a violation.”

“The way in which the AG’s office has argued this already shows that they think that their power is unlimited,” Loewy said.

Sending a Message

Just as Paxton’s campaign against transgender care for minors has sent a chill through the network of people who provide this medical care, the impacts of the attorney general’s investigation of Annunciation House are reverberating throughout the community of people who work with migrants.

On Friday, Annunciation House’s lawyers filed a motion to throw out the attorney general’s case. Aside from arguing that Paxton’s claims about the organization are unfounded, the nonprofit said in the legal filings that the probe has caused harm that is “not only imminent, it is ongoing.”

Immediately after the attorney general officials showed up at the nonprofit’s offices in February, three Annunciation House volunteers quit, including the woman who answered the door. They worried the situation was “more unpredictable” than they could handle, Garcia said.

According to court records filed by Annunciation House attorneys, some volunteers have received threatening phone calls. The filings also state that the city of El Paso started stationing security guards at all of the nonprofit’s shelters “around the clock” to protect the people who are staying there.

“It’s scaring people from wanting to volunteer with us,” Garcia said. “It’s scaring people from wanting to work with the refugees.”

Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, an El Paso-based nonprofit that works with Annunciation House and provides legal services to immigrants and refugees on both sides of the border, has not lost volunteers, but the organization’s executive director, Marisa Limón Garza, said people were rattled by the fact that employees from Paxton’s office showed up at a fellow nonprofit’s door demanding access.

“If it’s a letter in the mail, that’s one thing,” Limón Garza said. “But coming and trying to access the space, that’s a different level of state intervention that definitely sends a chilling effect. It sends a message.”

That message changed how Las Americas operates. It updated its security and technology systems at a cost of $25,000, money the nonprofit’s leadership hadn’t planned to spend, Limón Garza said. The organization also better secured its internal files, got new cellphones and laptops, and added new intercom and doorbell screening systems.

It no longer allows walk-ins.

Filed under —
Politics

Vianna Davila is a reporter with the ProPublica-Texas Tribune Investigative Initiative.
vianna.davila@propublica.org
@viannadavila

	tskimberlyann on ‘Facebook Memories: 18 Jun…
	SharonAnne McC on ‘Facebook Memories: 18 Jun…
	tskimberlyann on ‘Facebook Memories: 18 Jun…
	SharonAnne McC on ‘Facebook Memories: 18 Jun…
	tskimberlyann on ‘Facebook Memories: 18 Jun…

Slim and Me

The Gods of Mount Olympos must be watching

‘Un-Safe At Home’

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Share this:

Related

Leave a comment Cancel reply