Critics argue that banning gender-affirming care harms trans youth, likening it to a “body count.” They stress that these laws worsen mental and physical health by denying necessary support and medical treatments. Such restrictions violate human rights and perpetuate discrimination, endangering the well-being of transgender individuals.
Last Friday, Governor Mark Gordon of Wyoming signed Senate File 99 into law, making Wyoming the 24th state to ban or limit gender-affirming care for minors. This law imposes penalties on medical professionals, including pharmacists, who provide minors with puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, or gender-affirming surgeries. Such penalties include revoking medical licenses and prohibiting practice in the state.
With healthcare providers mandated to cease such care, many fear this law will compel numerous transgender youth to abandon their transition, with detrimental effects on their mental well-being.
In a nuanced statement, Governor Gordon expressed support for the bill’s child protections but voiced concerns about government intrusion into family matters. This sentiment was echoed by Gillian Branstetter of the National Center for Transgender Equality, who criticized politicians for meddling in private healthcare decisions and exploiting children for political gain.
Contrary to supporters’ claims that gender-affirming care is experimental and unsafe, these treatments have a long history of safe use in cisgender children for conditions like cancer and early-onset puberty.
Opponents of the law, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wyoming, argue that it denies critical support to struggling transgender youth, pushing them into further isolation and endangerment. They vow to continue advocating for transgender rights and support.
Currently, 23 other states have enacted similar laws restricting or banning gender-affirming care for minors, prompting some families with transgender children to relocate to more accepting states. In contrast, 14 states and Washington, D.C. have implemented “shield” laws protecting minors’ access to gender-affirming care and safeguarding their privacy from out-of-state inquiries.
Medical professionals are worried about the long-term physical and mental effects of anti-LGBTQ legislation.
This year, various states have endeavored to prohibit transgender individuals from using public restrooms and updating identity documents such as driver’s licenses. Legislators across multiple states are pushing to amend state statutes to define sex based on reproductive capability and to omit gender identity from discrimination safeguards.
Thus far, these bills aimed at undermining civil rights protections for transgender people and barring them from public facilities have faced limited success. According to the ACLU, only five anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been enacted into law this year, and several states notorious for promoting such legislation—like Florida, Utah, and West Virginia—have concluded their legislative sessions for the year.
Nevertheless, these endeavors could have dire consequences for the lives of transgender adults, prompting concerns among medical professionals about the long-term physical and mental health implications of the ongoing political campaign to curtail LGBTQ+ rights. Furthermore, many of the active bills could lead to gaps in medical care for transgender individuals during a period of heightened anxiety.
Currently, Ashton Colby finds himself enduring chronic stress. As a 31-year-old transgender man of White ethnicity residing near Columbus, Ohio, he has experienced significant turmoil as state policies regarding gender-affirming care have unexpectedly shifted in recent months.
He expressed, “With my fundamental, basic humanity being up on the public chopping block and up for debate, in so many ways, I feel gutted and dehumanized and completely misunderstood for all that I am.”
Colby, burdened by stress for years over anti-trans policies, never imagined the possibility of trans adults being denied medical care. In Ohio, such a scenario nearly materialized when Republican governor Mike DeWine proposed restrictions on gender-affirming care for adults in lieu of supporting a statewide ban on minors’ care. However, following public outcry, the state’s health agency declared it would not implement those restrictions for adults.
Initially fearing the loss of his medical provider of eight years, Colby contemplated relocating to Denver. He also harbors concerns that his access to necessary documentation and his rights as a transgender individual could be jeopardized if Republicans secure victories in the White House and Congress this year.
Dr. Carl Streed, president of the U.S. Professional Association for Transgender Health (USPATH), constantly reflects on the adverse health outcomes resulting from trans individuals feeling unsafe while navigating society. He believes that anti-trans policies will exacerbate feelings of isolation during what the surgeon general has termed an epidemic of isolation and loneliness in the United States.
“These policies that restrict people’s public life are effectively directly harming them, both in terms of immediate issues around mental health, connection to community, accessing care in urgent situations, but long-term, we’re going to see worse health outcomes in probably the next five, ten years, if not sooner,” he stated.
These worse health outcomes could include increased isolation and the inability to engage in public life and in-person community interactions, leading to diminished cardiovascular fitness and a higher risk of heart attacks and strokes due to elevated cholesterol and hypertension levels. Streed also noted that isolation is linked to impaired cognitive function and reduced memory.
“They’re definitely creating quite the checkerboard of restricted public spaces,” remarked Streed, a primary care physician at Boston Medical Center. “But the issue is, these are national discourses. What happens in Florida is a conversation I have with my patients in the exam room.”
Transgender individuals in states without healthcare restrictions or limitations on accessing public spaces are understandably anxious about such policies in other states, he noted. These restrictions can still impact them while visiting friends and family.
The ACLU is currently monitoring approximately 200 active anti-LGBTQ+ bills advancing through state legislatures this year. Although many bills have been defeated, fear and apprehension within the transgender community, and much of the larger LGBTQ+ community, remain alarmingly high.
In Florida, a series of often convoluted anti-LGBTQ+ policies are designed to instill fear, according to Simone Chriss, an attorney with the Southern Legal Counsel in Florida and director of the organization’s transgender rights initiative. Speaking on a press call in February, she described the intent as creating fear and confusion to obscure individuals’ rights, leading them to err on the side of caution.
Angelique Godwin, an Afro-Latina transgender woman and advocate with Equality Florida, shared with The 19th how transgender Floridians have supported each other amidst mounting restrictions on daily life. Godwin recounted losing access to healthcare last spring when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law preventing patients from accessing gender-affirming care from nurse practitioners. Additionally, she faced challenges refilling her prescription for estradiol valerate following the law’s passage, as pharmacies refused service amid the ensuing confusion.
“Thankfully, I had a stash, I had my own little reserve of medications for myself. But there were people close to me that were affected by that who had no access,” she recounted.
Godwin eventually found a facility in Tampa with a doctor offering care on a sliding-scale payment system, maintained coverage through the federal government’s health insurance marketplace, and continued appointments with her regular doctor for mental health visits under the new law.
Mutual aid grants and organizations like Folx Health, an LGBTQ+ telehealth provider, have helped fill gaps in care. Folx requires an in-person doctor’s visit, during which patients review and sign a consent form for care compliant with state laws.
“Those first three months from June to August, a lot of people struggled. Since then, most of the people I know that are here in Florida are still here,” she observed.
Approximately 30 bills seeking to restrict transgender youth and adults’ access to healthcare are still progressing through statehouses, per the ACLU. These bills would prohibit gender-affirming care—such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy—for transgender youth, block insurance or Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming care, and limit access to such care for incarcerated transgender individuals.
Even in states without restrictions on gender-affirming care, accessing it remains challenging for many transgender people across the country. For some, accessing essential healthcare necessitates traveling across state lines.
Dr. Angela Rodriguez, a plastic surgeon specializing in transgender care based in San Francisco, often treats patients who travel to California. She has encountered patients from Alabama, where finding a good dentist or primary care physician is difficult.
She noted a common concern among out-of-state patients over the last several years: who will care for them in the long run?
“I have patients that elect to come back, fly all the way from the East Coast because they don’t feel comfortable talking to a local physician,” she said. She ensures that patients traveling from out of state have a support system, such as a loved one or friend in California who can assist them after a surgical procedure.
Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, the president-elect of USPATH who works with adolescents and young adult patients at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, observed that the mental health of her young transgender patients has deteriorated as states ban gender-affirming care for minors. Her patients also express concerns about existing in public in certain states and whether they can safely use public restrooms. Florida and Utah have enacted extreme public bathroom bans, while eight other states prohibit transgender individuals from using restrooms aligning with their gender identity in schools.
“I don’t think people have even really grasped the mental health toll of the pandemic, but to have this added on top of it is truly an immense burden for adolescents,” she remarked. A majority of her patients are preparing for college and graduate school — and a significant portion of them intend to steer clear of pursuing higher education in states enacting anti-trans legislation.
Olson-Kennedy herself doesn’t feel secure on social media. As a provider of gender-affirming care, it’s often a hostile environment for her and her colleagues, as their work has been politicized by Republican lawmakers, lobbyists, and far-right media personalities.
“You can only handle so much of hearing threats of violence when you leave your clinic,” she noted. “That’s not something they teach you in medical school… This is uncharted territory for children’s hospitals and pediatricians.”
Olson-Kennedy emphasized the need for more people to comprehend the significance of gender-affirming care. This care is administered over an extended period, with parents and guardians involved for minors, she explained, and it addresses the profound despair caused by gender dysphoria experienced by many transgender individuals.
“I wish people could set aside their discomfort and lack of understanding and truly acknowledge that this care is medically necessary. It’s incredibly important, and it transforms and saves lives,” she stressed.
The posts characterize transgender individuals as “suffering from mental illness,” “associated with Satanism,” “viewed as sexual predators,” “labeled as pedophiles,” “portrayed as terrorists,” and “branded as perverts.”
According to a recent report by the LGBTQ+ media advocacy group GLAAD, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, has neglected to uphold its own regulations concerning anti-transgender hate content. This failure extends to posts generated by influential political figures and media outlets. The report reveals a multitude of instances where trans individuals are denigrated with slurs like “tr***y” and branded as “mentally ill,” “satanic,” “sexual predators,” “pedophiles,” “terrorists,” and “perverts.” The Washington Post highlighted examples, such as an image depicting a group of people stoning a person identified as transgender to death and another portraying a masked individual armed with a gun standing atop a demon painted in the colors of the transgender flag.
Additional documented posts asserted that transgender individuals aim to “sexualize, sterilize, and harm children.” Others deliberately misgendered transgender celebrities, ridiculed victims of transgender suicide, endorsed violence against medical professionals providing gender-affirming care, advocated for conversion therapy, and called for the “elimination” of transgender individuals.
These posts originated from accounts associated with right-wing outlets such as The Daily Wire, Gays Against Groomers, Chaya Raichik’s Libs of TikTok, The Babylon Bee, and One Million Moms.
Such posts blatantly violate Meta’s declared policies against anti-LGBTQ+ hate speech and “dehumanizing speech” that undermines the dignity of marginalized groups, promotes bullying or harassment, or suggests that a protected group should not exist.
In June 2023, over 250 LGBTQ+ celebrities, public figures, and allies, including Elliot Page, Laverne Cox, Jamie Lee Curtis, Janelle Monáe, Gabrielle Union, Judd Apatow, Ariana Grande, and Jonathan Van Ness, penned an open letter facilitated by GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign, urging Meta and other social media platforms to take stronger action against the pervasive spread of anti-transgender hate speech. However, the recent report indicates that Meta has not made sufficient efforts to combat this onslaught.
Facebook’s Oversight Board acknowledged in September 2023 that the issue lies not in Meta’s policies but in their enforcement, criticizing the company’s repeated failure to take appropriate action against harmful content despite numerous warnings. GLAAD condemned Meta’s neglect in safeguarding users from hate speech, highlighting Meta’s own acknowledgment of the role hate speech plays in fostering an environment of intimidation and exclusion, and its failure to address this effectively.
Furthermore, some LGBTQ+ content creators on Meta have accused the company of limiting their content’s reach due to new restrictions on political content, including discussions of politicians and queer social issues.
Despite soaring revenues, Meta has been criticized for downsizing crucial trust and safety teams while increasingly relying on ineffective AI systems for content moderation. These enforcement failures have drawn repeated criticism and concern from the Oversight Board, with reports suggesting that some users’ reports on harmful content are not being reviewed at all.
A legislator voiced alarm over state law deeming self-expression harmful to minors, sparking a debate on the balance between personal freedom and safeguarding youth.
The Republican-dominated legislature of Kansas has passed a bill that opponents argue might outlaw minors’ access to LGBTQ+ content online.
Modeling after legislations in Texas, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Utah, and Virginia in recent times, S.B. 394 aims to block minors from reaching adult-oriented websites. This bill mandates websites hosting material deemed “harmful to minors” to confirm that Kansas visitors are at least 18 years old. Concerns have been raised regarding the possibility of privacy infringement, as visitors would be required to furnish their government-issued identification.
According to the Associated Press, State Representative Ken Collins, one of the two Kansas Republicans who opposed the bill, expressed concerns that the data used for age verification could be acquired by parties with intentions to misuse it for fraudulent activities.
Accompanied by privacy apprehensions, LGBTQ+ advocates and certain Kansas Democrats are concerned that the state’s definition of material deemed “harmful to minors” could potentially lead to a broad interpretation of the proposed law, effectively prohibiting young people’s access to any LGBTQ+ content online. According to current state statutes, “harmful to minors” material encompasses “sexual conduct,” which includes aspects such as “acts of masturbation, homosexuality, [and] sexual intercourse.”
Rep. Collins pointed out that S.B. 394 leaves ambiguity regarding the scope of its restrictions, while Rep. Brandon Woodard (D) of Kansas argued that, under state law, simply being LGBTQ+ is categorized as harmful to minors.
In a Threads post discussing the bill, Alejandra Caraballo, a trans activist and clinical instructor at Harvard Law’s Cyberlaw Clinic, highlighted that Kansas residents might soon require their state IDs to access content featuring LGBTQ+ individuals.
Notably, S.B. 394 is more stringent compared to similar laws in other states, as it targets websites with 25% adult content rather than the 1/3 threshold observed elsewhere, as noted by Boing Boing. The proposed law mandates fines of up to $10,000 for sites failing to verify the ages of Kansas users and permits parents to sue for a minimum of $50,000 in damages if minors access “harmful content.”
The bill was passed in the state’s House of Representatives with a vote of 92–31 on Tuesday, following unanimous approval in the Kansas Senate last month. While Governor Laura Kelly (D) has not indicated her stance on signing the bill, given the overwhelming support for S.B. 394 in the state legislature, lawmakers likely possess sufficient votes to override a potential veto.
Critics argue that the proposed law may infringe upon the First Amendment’s free speech protections. However, a similar law in Texas was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals last year. The court determined that Texas’s law did not violate the First Amendment, asserting that the state has a legitimate interest in preventing minors from accessing pornography.
The state legislature is poised to override a veto from Democratic Governor Laura Kelly, highlighting political tensions and democratic principles.
The Kansas legislature’s Republican members are on the brink of turning their state into the 25th to prohibit medical care for transgender youth by proceeding with an override vote. Despite Governor Laura Kelly (D) anticipated veto, the Republican party commands supermajorities in both the Kansas House and Senate.
“Today, the Senate demonstrated a steadfast commitment to safeguarding children by emphasizing that extreme transgender ideology and the medical alteration of minors are neither lawful nor embraced in Kansas,” remarked State Senate President Ty Masterson (R) subsequent to Wednesday’s vote, which forwarded Senate Bill 233 to the governor for consideration.
Governor Kelly has affirmed her intention to veto the bill.
If approved, the legislation will prohibit transgender individuals under 18 from accessing crucial medical treatments, such as gender-affirming surgeries and puberty blockers. While gender-affirming surgery is rarely performed on minors, puberty blockers, which delay the onset of puberty, offer transgender youth and their families valuable time for self-discovery before irreversible changes occur. Studies have shown that puberty blockers can significantly decrease the lifelong risk of suicide among transgender individuals.
With the anticipated override, Kansas is set to become the third state this year to outlaw gender-affirming care for minors, joining four other states where similar laws are currently entangled in legal proceedings.
Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes (D) appealed to Republicans to demonstrate compassion and empathy by voting against the bill. She emphasized the distress of families with transgender children, expressing concern that the legislation would exacerbate their fears and anxieties.
Sykes addressed Kansans directly, assuring them that some lawmakers empathize with their plight and understand the importance of receiving necessary care to live authentically. She underscored the detrimental impact the law would have on transgender individuals and their families if enacted.
In the previous year, Governor Kelly vetoed a comparable bill alongside another proposal aimed at restricting transgender women and girls from participating in female school sports. However, moderate GOP members refrained from supporting overrides initiated by their far-right counterparts.
This time, the votes in favor of advancing Senate Bill 233 suggest that the Republican supermajorities in both the state House and Senate will succeed in passing the anti-trans legislation.
Like in other conservative-leaning states that have banned gender-affirming care for minors, opponents of the law are expected to challenge it in court. Legal outcomes have been mixed thus far, with federal appeals courts divided on the constitutionality of such bans. Ultimately, the Supreme Court, which currently leans conservative with a 6-3 majority, may ultimately decide on the matter.
Authorities have taken three teenagers into custody in connection with the death of Franco.
This is a developing story. It contains descriptions of violence against a trans person.
According to the local CBS affiliate 2KUTV, the lifeless body of Alex Franco, a 21-year-old transgender man, was discovered on Tuesday morning in a secluded area of Utah, succumbing to a gunshot wound.
Reports suggest that Franco was abducted on Sunday afternoon. His girlfriend, Alyssa Henry, last saw him outside her Taylorsville residence, situated in the Salt Lake City metropolitan vicinity. Henry recounted to 2KUTV that Franco was conversing inside a white Jeep with acquaintances of theirs, purportedly arranged to provide transportation to the park for the couple. However, a gunshot emanated from within the vehicle, which swiftly departed. Authorities located Franco’s remains on Tuesday, bearing a lone gunshot injury, in a remote desert sector of Utah County, as detailed by the Taylorsville Police Department.
Subsequently, two teenage boys, aged 17 and 15, were apprehended in connection to the incident and presented in court on Wednesday. Another 17-year-old was detained early Thursday morning, as reported by local news outlet Fox 13. According to court statements cited by the station, the trio purportedly engaged in a dispute with Franco while attempting to sell him a firearm; Taylorsville Police disclosed that the teenagers had intended to rob Franco of the money allocated for the purchase of the weapon.
Law enforcement officials informed the news outlet that the three youths have been incarcerated at the Salt Lake Valley Detention Center, facing multiple felony charges. Their next court appearance is scheduled for March 27.
In a vigil held on Tuesday night, Franco’s loved ones congregated to honor his memory. Chloe Goold, a close friend, characterized him as someone who “illuminated every room he entered,” according to 2KUTV. Vinnie Franco, Alex’s grandfather, took to Facebook on Tuesday to pay tribute to his grandson, recalling how Alex had cared for him during times of incapacity and expressing joy for Alex’s journey of self-realization as a transgender individual.
To cover the funeral expenses of Franco, his family initiated a crowdfunding campaign, with any surplus funds allocated toward aiding the mental health recovery of grieving siblings.
Alejandra Caraballo alleges that X is shielding right-wing extremists while stifling the voices of transgender individuals.
Alejandra Caraballo, a transgender attorney and clinical instructor at Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic, appears to have received a permanent ban from X (formerly Twitter) for disseminating information regarding the alleged identity of a neo-Nazi figure, sparking questions about the platform’s content moderation policies under Elon Musk’s ownership. This development has reignited debates concerning free speech, hate speech, and the handling of far-right ideologies on the platform.
Caraballo’s permanent suspension was confirmed on Tuesday morning. Earlier, she had faced a temporary suspension after modifying her profile name to include that of a notorious right-wing extremist known for creating content steeped in racism and anti-Semitic themes.
The extremist in question, known for producing comic illustrations under the alias StoneToss, was purportedly revealed to be a 34-year-old former security guard and IT worker from Texas named Hans Kristian Graebener by a group of activists, the Anonymous Comrades Collective and Late-Night Anti-Fascists, as reported by Wired on March 12. Critics point out that StoneToss’s content frequently contains elements of anti-Semitism, transphobia, racism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry. Following the online posting of the individual’s name and photo by the activist group, some X users reported instances of suspension.
Journalist Steven Monacelli remarked on the atypical enforcement actions taken against Caraballo, observing, “Alejandra Caraballo’s account has been restricted, and her display name altered to remove reference to the neo-Nazi cartoonist Stone Toss. This level of enforcement is unprecedented in my experience. It appears Musk is going to great lengths to shield Stone Toss.”
Monacelli added, “Alejandra Caraballo has been suspended, rendering her account inaccessible, all due to sharing the name of the racist and antisemitic cartoonist Stone Toss.”
Another user on X criticized the platform’s decision, stating, “Alejandra Caraballo @Esqueer_ has been suspended yet again, this time indefinitely, simply for discussing publicly available information regarding a Nazi. X’s actions are becoming increasingly authoritarian. Freedom of speech seems conditional on Elon’s approval.” This sentiment underscores mounting concerns about the direction of X under Musk’s leadership, particularly regarding content moderation and political discourse.
Caraballo expressed to The Advocate, “Elon is personally instructing Twitter to shield StoneToss. The excessive measures suggest a haphazard and reactive approach.”
X’s policy regarding private information explicitly acknowledges that mentioning someone’s name is considered publicly available information and does not breach its guidelines. The measures taken against Caraballo have raised questions about the consistency and impartiality of X’s policy enforcement, especially concerning politically sensitive content.
Caraballo condemned Twitter’s explicit protection of neo-Nazis as morally reprehensible, highlighting how “the individual responsible for the neo-Nazi StoneToss comics directly appealed to his followers, who had a direct line to Elon. They heeded the call, prompting Twitter to crack down on anyone mentioning the name.”
Following the alleged identification of the creator on social media, StoneToss utilized X to rally his followers and address Musk directly, expressing opposition to what he perceived as attempts to silence him and others on the platform. He asserted, “One of you has a direct line to @elonmusk – and you need to use it,” adding, “This is not only about myself but also about others I know personally. There exists a whole community of artists who cannot create art anymore due to Twitter users organizing to punish them in real life for doing so.” He proposed that minor policy adjustments could alleviate the situation for far-right creators who have been driven away from other platforms.
Caraballo posted a screenshot of a violation notice indicating her account suspension for allegedly violating X’s rules on abusive behavior following a user report. According to the notice, modifying one’s profile name in a manner deemed as targeted harassment by the company constitutes a violation of the rules.
“I’m not surprised by their actions,” Caraballo remarked. “They seize any excuse to ban individuals Elon dislikes, particularly targeting trans people,” she added. “Andy Ngo has been actively seeking my suspension, and Elon now follows him.”
Previously, Musk had made derogatory remarks about Caraballo, referring to her as “crazy” in response to a post by Chaya Raichik, the creator of the anti-LGBTQ+ hate account Libs of TikTok.
Caraballo’s suspension coincides with broader discussions about X’s policies under Musk’s ownership, particularly regarding the treatment of LGBTQ+ users and the platform’s stance on hate speech. Caraballo had been outspoken in criticizing X’s management of far-right content and policy adjustments that she argued were detrimental to the transgender community.
In early March, X faced significant backlash for reversing its policy on anti-trans hate speech, which aimed to reduce the visibility of posts misgendering or deadnaming users upon report by the affected individual. The policy reversal, influenced by complaints from right-wing users and influencers, underscored the platform’s inconsistent commitment to safeguarding LGBTQ+ users from harassment. Critics, including advocacy groups and individual users, denounced the change, highlighting broader concerns about X’s policies under Musk’s leadership.
According to GLAAD’s Social Media Safety Index, X ranks as the worst platform for LGBTQ+ user safety.
The Advocate sought insight from the individual known as StoneToss but received no response. When asked for comment regarding Caraballo’s suspension, X replied, “Busy now, please check back later.”
However, late Tuesday night, Musk claimed he was unaware of the reasons behind Caraballo’s suspension in response to a post from Libs of TikTok.
“I’m uncertain why this account was suspended, but under our new policy, permanent suspensions are exceedingly rare and would necessitate numerous repeated infractions (unless blatantly a spam/scam account),” he stated.
Four hours later, Musk responded to another tweet from Libs of TikTok, stating, “The team has informed me that there were multiple instances of doxxing violations by this account, despite repeated warnings. The suspension is only for a few days initially, but the duration will increase with each subsequent violation.”
Caraballo expressed that her suspension hampers her efforts to bring national attention to overlooked stories and coverage of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, but she affirmed her commitment to continue her work.
“I still have other platforms, so I’ll persevere regardless. Twitter’s relevance has dwindled significantly as it has devolved into a hub of hate and spam bots,” Caraballo remarked.
The two are also accused of stealing tens of thousands of dollars and buying a car with the man’s credit card.
Two individuals accused of fatally poisoning and stabbing a retired university professor in Washington State, whom they initially encountered on the gay dating and hookup app Scruff, have been apprehended by the police.
Philip Brewer, aged 32, and Christina Hardy, aged 47, were arrested in California on Thursday in connection to the robbery and murder of Curtis Engeland, aged 74, from Mercer Island, Wash. Engeland was reported missing by his family on February 24, and his body was discovered on March 7 near Cosmopolis, Wash.
Brewer and Hardy face charges of first-degree murder, first-degree kidnapping, first-degree theft, and identity theft.
According to court documents obtained by various media outlets, including the Daily Mail, the duo allegedly devised a plan to eliminate the victim and take over his residence, while also seizing control of his financial assets and indulging in lavish purchases shortly after his demise.
According to court documents, Brewer and Engeland initially connected on Scruff in January and arranged their first date at a Starbucks during the same month. Later, the pair had another date at Engeland’s residence on Mercer Island to watch a movie, during which Engeland fell asleep. Upon awakening, he discovered Brewer missing along with his cell phone, car keys, safe deposit box keys, credit cards, and money. Engeland promptly contacted the authorities to report the thefts.
Over the ensuing weeks, court records indicate that tens of thousands of dollars were drained from Engeland’s accounts. Notably, it’s alleged that one significant expense was the acquisition of a $25,000 car using Engeland’s credit card.
Police suspect that Brewer and Hardy confronted Engeland at his home on February 23, administering a fatal dose of fentanyl via injection, stabbing him in the neck, and then disposing of his body in Cosmopolis. Following the crime, the duo purportedly took up residence in Engeland’s home and deliberately sent misleading text messages to themselves in order to confuse law enforcement. These messages were also sent to Engeland’s acquaintances, indicating that he would be absent for “the next three to six weeks” and that part of his house was being rented out to someone named “Christina” during his absence.
One of Engeland’s friends, who was romantically involved with him and planning to move in, received a text message at 3 a.m. the following day. He informed investigators that he found the timing and content of the text “suspicious,” as stated in court documents. This prompted him to report Engeland missing and mention that Brewer and Hardy were now residing in his home.
Upon police arrival at the residence, Brewer, Hardy, and her son were found present. They informed the authorities that Engeland had left but had granted them permission to utilize his residence and vehicle during his absence. As Engeland’s siblings arrived during the interview, they too expressed concern over the texts they had received, highlighting that their brother, a retired English professor, consistently communicated in grammatically correct sentences. At the insistence of the siblings, Brewer, Hardy, and her son vacated the premises, prompting an immediate commencement of the police investigation.
Shortly afterward, Engeland’s vehicle was discovered in a supermarket parking lot, with a bloodstained box found in the truck bed.
A significant breakthrough occurred the following Thursday when a man was apprehended for speeding by the California Highway Patrol near the desert town of Blythe on the Arizona border. The individual claimed to be in a relationship with Hardy’s daughter and asserted that he was fleeing from Brewer and Hardy, who were residing with him. He alleged that the pair had confessed to poisoning and stabbing Engeland, then disposing of the body. Police were informed by the fleeing individual that Brewer and Hardy intended to abduct Hardy’s daughter to return her to Washington, as they anticipated incarceration and wished for her to care for Hardy’s other children.
Brewer and Hardy were apprehended on the same day in California and are scheduled for extradition to Washington to face trial.
Mercer Island Police Chief Ed Holmes expressed condolences to Engeland’s family, stating, “First and foremost, we must acknowledge Mr. Engeland’s family – when this incident was first reported to police as a missing person, we hoped for a better outcome. The family remained determined to help our investigation over the past few weeks, and we hope some comfort can be found through the hard work being done to bring justice for Curtis and his loved ones.”
Laurie Goeken, Engeland’s neighbor for more than a decade, revealed to radio station KIRO that Engeland had been living alone since his husband passed away several years prior.
“He was not just a neighbor but also a cherished friend, a truly remarkable individual,” Goeken expressed to KIRO. “Engeland had a passion for gardening and hiking, embodying a truly special spirit.”
Goeken emphasized the collective concern among those who knew Engeland regarding his sudden disappearance.
“The disappearance of Engeland raised immediate suspicion among us,” Goeken remarked. “It was highly out of character for him. He held a deep affection for his cats, whom he adored. Whenever he was away, we would care for his cats, and he would reciprocate. Leaving them unattended was something he would never do.”
GLAAD is criticizing Meta for its ongoing failure to effectively moderate anti-trans content on its platforms.
Amid an intensifying debate regarding social media’s responsibility in protecting LGBTQ+ individuals, GLAAD, a leading advocate for LGBTQ+ rights and representation, has strongly rebuked Meta for its ongoing inadequacy in moderating anti-transgender hate content. The rebuke was issued on Friday following Meta’s response to a decision by its Oversight Board concerning a concerning case of anti-trans content on one of its platforms.
Roughly eight weeks ago, the Oversight Board, vested with the authority to render non-binding yet precedent-establishing judgments on content moderation across Meta’s platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, reversed the company’s initial verdict to permit a post containing hateful rhetoric targeting transgender individuals to persist online.
Meta initially deemed a Facebook post, which appeared innocuous at first glance but contained imagery and text hinting at harm directed towards a gender identity-defined group, as non-violative. However, upon reevaluation, Meta recognized the content as infringing its Hate Speech policy, which prohibits content advocating harm or suicide against individuals or groups based on protected characteristics, including gender identity.
The post in question, which encouraged harm to trans people, highlighted a broader issue of Meta’s systemic failure to enforce its community standards against anti-LGBTQ hate speech, GLAAD noted.
Meta’s response to the Oversight Board’s ruling stated that it is “assessing feasibility” for more effectively moderating content representing gender identity through symbolic imagery without depicting human figures, as reported by Meta’s Transparency Center. However, GLAAD and other LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations view this response as insufficient, emphasizing the need for tangible action, which Meta has yet to provide despite months of demands.
Jenni Olson, senior director of the GLAAD Social Media Safety Program, voiced frustration over the timing of Meta’s Friday afternoon statement, issued just before the 60-day deadline set by the Oversight Board for public responses to its rulings.
GLAAD’s concerns were previously expressed in a June 2023 open letter, co-signed by over 250 LGBTQ+ celebrities, influencers, and allies, addressed to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other social media leaders. The letter denounced the widespread dissemination of anti-trans hate and harmful misinformation about transgender healthcare on the company’s platforms. It underscored the tangible repercussions, such as threats against healthcare providers and patients fueled by online hate and misinformation. Despite this direct call for action, Meta has not publicly outlined a plan to tackle these systemic issues.
GLAAD’s criticism is grounded in thorough research, including insights from its 2023 Social Media Safety Index. This index assesses the policies and practices of major social media platforms concerning LGBTQ+ user safety. According to GLAAD, the report exposes deficiencies in policy enforcement and moderator training regarding LGBTQ+ content. These shortcomings contribute to an environment where anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric not only endures but flourishes.
Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD, stated in a press release, “Meta’s continuous lapses in enforcing their own policies against anti-LGBTQ, particularly anti-trans hate, are utterly unacceptable.”
Ellis added, “The company has eroded the trust of its LGBTQ users, and genuine action is needed to start rebuilding it.”
Friends and family have turned to social media to honor and remember his life.
This article discusses the passing of an individual who identified as Black and transgender.
Last week, Righteous Torrence “Chevy” Hill, a cherished member of Atlanta’s LGBTQ+ community, tragically lost his life. He was 35 years old.
While details surrounding Hill’s passing remain unclear, an outpouring of tributes has flooded social media platforms. Affectionately known as “Chevy” and “TK” among loved ones, Hill was the proprietor of Evollusion, a salon that aimed to provide a sanctuary where the barbershop experience transformed into a space of safety and affirmation for young Black queer individuals, as highlighted by the Atlanta-based Black trans advocacy organization, Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative (SnapCo). On March 3, the salon took to Facebook to announce Hill’s passing, expressing gratitude for the heartfelt messages and shared memories that have provided solace during this difficult time. The post read, “The kind words and shared memories make our hearts smile and ease the pain. We know the awesome person Righteous was, but seeing the place he holds in your hearts brings some joy to our difficult days.”
In an Instagram post on Tuesday, model and activist Yves Mathieu honored Hill’s memory and shed light on his life. Mathieu reflected on the challenges faced by young Black queer boys/kids in navigating the barbershop experience, noting that Hill recognized this and endeavored to create a safe space where individuals could receive both the affirming style they desired and a sense of security. Mathieu praised Hill for successfully cultivating such an environment.
On Thursday, SnapCo took to Instagram to announce Hill’s homegoing service, describing him as “a soul who radiated love and light.”
SnapCo executive director Toni Michelle stated to Them that despite the lack of details surrounding Hill’s murder, they are providing support for Hill’s friends and chosen family in Atlanta as they mourn.
“We must pledge to protect one another, and practice that commitment,” she emphasized, adding, “Gun violence is plaguing our community, and anti-trans rhetoric and legislation fuel the violence that Black and trans people face each day. We pray that justice for Chevy, as well as the people who knew and cherished him the most, will be served in our lifetime.”
Michelle concluded her statement by urging individuals to sign SnapCo’s pledge to protect Black people and trans people.
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.