Proud Boys and Antifa clash outside of a Koreatown spa

[Luce]

Kind of like Christians being persecuted because of their beliefs. Maybe you should look in the mirror.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Their parents were with them.

Finally, someone with a reasonable response. As I stated before, I do not know if this trans woman is a POS or not. By law, the trans woman was allowed to be in a condition of nudity in the woman section of the spa. The term " partially erect" is vague as there are multiple stages of arousal, so the only facts we can prove in court ( without photographic evidence) is that this trans woman was naked in the woman's only area which, according to California law, is a place they are allowed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court.

 

[Aristaeus]

Finally, someone with a reasonable response. As I stated before, I do not know if this trans woman is a POS or not. By law, the trans woman was allowed to be in a condition of nudity in the woman section of the spa. The term " partially erect" is vague as there are multiple stages of arousal, so the only facts we can prove in court ( without photographic evidence) is that this trans woman was naked in the woman's only area which, according to California law, is a place they are allowed. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court.

Just being undressed in a changing room does not result in people being convicted of indecent exposure.

Millions of people are in various stages of undress in gym, spa and swimming pool changing rooms around the world every day without getting arrested.

A conviction of indecent exposure in a changing room must have fairly compelling evidence to overcome a defence of "I was just changing".

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Just being undressed in a changing room does not result in people being convicted of indecent exposure.

Millions of people are in various stages of undress in gym, spa and swimming pool changing rooms around the world every day without getting arrested.

A conviction of indecent exposure in a changing room must have fairly compelling evidence to overcome a defence of "I was just changing".

Oh? And you came by this conclusion how? In California, for it to constitute indecent exposure, the act must be done in a manner that the defendant had intent to draw public attention to their genitals for sexual gratification or to offend another person. Normally, "public attention" does not happen inside a spa where people are expected to be naked. Also, it would be very difficult to prove sexual gratification because, again, you are inside a area where people are expected to be naked. Also, the term "partially erect" is very vague and subjective. For example, this person might of just had an extremely large penis, which might give the appearance of being partially erect, but not actually being partially erect. Now, while I can see the emotional aspect of this has biased your reasoning. I'm going to reserve my opinion until we see what happens in court.

 

[Aristaeus]

Oh? And you came by this conclusion how? In California, for it to constitute indecent exposure, the act must be done in a manner that the defendant had intent to draw public attention to their genitals for sexual gratification or to offend another person. Normally, "public attention" does not happen inside a spa where people are expected to be naked. Also, it would be very difficult to prove sexual gratification because, again, you are inside a area where people are expected to be naked. Also, the term "partially erect" is very vague and subjective. For example, this person might of just had an extremely large penis, which might give the appearance of being partially erect, but not actually being partially erect. Now, while I can see the emotional aspect of this has biased your reasoning. I'm going to reserve my opinion until we see what happens in court.

So what, you think it's just bad luck this person has been convicted multiple times on indecent exposure and is being investigated for more??

I'm not the one being biased You would not be giving this person this much leeway if they didn't claim to be trans.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

So what, you think it's just bad luck this person has been convicted multiple times on indecent exposure and is being investigated for more??

I'm not the one being biased You would not be giving this person this much leeway if they didn't claim to be trans.

The letter of the law allows trans women to legally access women's only areas, where women walk around naked. The question is, are trans women being allowed to go naked in these women's areas without the threat of prosecution. Keep in mind this trans woman was not charged with lewd conduct.... Just indecent exposure. Now I have already schooled you, multiple times, on the fact that one can be charged and convicted of indecent exposure just for exposing their genitalia. And the question still remains, was this trans woman arrested solely for walking around naked in a woman's area that she was allowed, by law, to be in. Now you've made the assumption that because this trans woman has been convicted of indecent exposure under the exact same circumstances as the Wi Spa incident. But you are ignoring the fact that this trans woman has claimed she has been targeted by law inforcement for for doing what other women (without penises) do in these woman's only areas. Do you finally understand? Because it's getting tiresome and monotonous explaining the facts of this case to you over and over and over and.......

 

[Aristaeus]

The letter of the law allows trans women to legally access women's only areas, where women walk around naked. The question is, are trans women being allowed to go naked in these women's areas without the threat of prosecution. Keep in mind this trans woman was not charged with lewd conduct.... Just indecent exposure. Now I have already schooled you, multiple times, on the fact that one can be charged and convicted of indecent exposure just for exposing their genitalia. And the question still remains, was this trans woman arrested solely for walking around naked in a woman's area that she was allowed, by law, to be in. Now you've made the assumption that because this trans woman has been convicted of indecent exposure under the exact same circumstances as the Wi Spa incident. But you are ignoring the fact that this trans woman has claimed she has been targeted by law inforcement for for doing what other women (without penises) do in these woman's only areas. Do you finally understand? Because it's getting tiresome and monotonous explaining the facts of this case to you over and over and over and.......

Your claim that this person has been convicted and charged multiple times just for getting changed is absurd.

Tamara Lave, a University of Miami law professor and former public defender in California, said that prosecutors in indecent exposure cases have to prove a defendant not only “willfully exposed” themselves in front of others, but that the person did so with the intention of arousing themselves or sexually offending another individual.

“If somebody goes into a spa and sits naked in the tub, and all they are trying to do is relax, the fact that they are naked in public is not enough for them to be guilty of a crime,”

LAPD said that five individuals had come forward, and that the department “conducted interviews of victims and witnesses, reviewed the evidence, and ultimately corroborated the allegations of indecent exposure”.

Merager has been a registered sex offender since 2006, police said, and has a history of previous indecent exposure charges. Merager was convicted of indecent exposure in LA in 2002 and 2003, and pleaded not guilty to seven counts of indecent exposure in an alleged December 2018 case, according to court records. That case is still open.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Your claim that this person has been convicted and charged multiple times just for getting changed is absurd.

Tamara Lave, a University of Miami law professor and former public defender in California, said that prosecutors in indecent exposure cases have to prove a defendant not only “willfully exposed” themselves in front of others, but that the person did so with the intention of arousing themselves or sexually offending another individual.

“If somebody goes into a spa and sits naked in the tub, and all they are trying to do is relax, the fact that they are naked in public is not enough for them to be guilty of a crime,”

LAPD said that five individuals had come forward, and that the department “conducted interviews of victims and witnesses, reviewed the evidence, and ultimately corroborated the allegations of indecent exposure”.

Merager has been a registered sex offender since 2006, police said, and has a history of previous indecent exposure charges. Merager was convicted of indecent exposure in LA in 2002 and 2003, and pleaded not guilty to seven counts of indecent exposure in an alleged December 2018 case, according to court records. That case is still open.

You should of read the entire article that you got the Tamara Lave quote from. Later in the same article we hear from Luis A. Vasquez, a UCLA Williams Institute lawyer and an expert on LGBTQ + protections, who noted that while there is no evidence that the approval of trans-inclusive policies for restrooms and public spaces has led to greater risks or damage to safety, There is significant evidence of harassment and abuse that trans people have faced in restrooms and other public facilities. The woman who posted the video of herself complaining about a man in the woman's area of the Wi spa, who goes by " Cubana Angel", is actually a transphobic political activist campaigning for the repeal of the California law that allows trans people to use facilities that match their gender. So there appears to be a lot more to this than your emotionalized over simplified version let's on. And, as I've said before, when this goes to court, with all the publicity it's gotten, and depending on the competency of the defence, things could swing ( pun intended) in favor of the defendant. Remember I said that.

 

[buck]

You should of read the entire article that you got the Tamara Lave quote from. Later in the same article we hear from Luis A. Vasquez, a UCLA Williams Institute lawyer and an expert on LGBTQ + protections, who noted that while there is no evidence that the approval of trans-inclusive policies for restrooms and public spaces has led to greater risks or damage to , There is significant evidence of harassment and abuse that trans people have faced in restrooms and other public facilities.

The expert you quoted is not being accurate. There is evidence that more transgender inclusive policies for changing, locker.and bathrooms leads to greater risks and damages to women.

The data, obtained through a Freedom of Information request by the Sunday Times, suggests that unisex changing rooms are more dangerous for women and girls than single-sex facilities.

...What’s more, two thirds of all sexual attacks at leisure centres and public swimming pools take place in unisex changing rooms.

...Unisex facilities account for less than half the changing areas across the UK, but the number is on the rise - doing away with separate male and female changing rooms and toilets is seen as a way to cut staff costs and better cater for transgender people.

I admit that I have seen evidence of trans facing harassment in bathrooms, etc. That is typically because they are trying to use the bathrooms of the opposite sex. MtF using female bathrooms, for exmple.

Additionally, Cubana angel was.only one of the 5 complaints. According to a couple of tweets I have seen from other witnesses, they were not together. So, the attempt to claim this didn't happen because one of the complainants is biased, doesn't account for the other complainants.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

The expert you quoted is not being accurate. There is evidence that more transgender inclusive policies for changing, locker.and bathrooms leads to greater risks and damages to women.





I admit that I have seen evidence of trans facing harassment in bathrooms, etc. That is typically because they are trying to use the bathrooms of the opposite sex. MtF using female bathrooms, for exmple.

Additionally, Cubana angel was.only one of the 5 complaints. According to a couple of tweets I have seen from other witnesses, they were not together. So, the attempt to claim this didn't happen because one of the complainants is biased, doesn't account for the other complainants.

We're going in circles. We'll see what happens in court.

 

[Aristaeus]

We're going in circles. We'll see what happens in court.

And if it's a guilty verdict will that be because the person is a pervert or will you still think they are an innocent victim of transphobia who was just getting changed?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

And if it's a guilty verdict will that be because the person is a pervert or will you still think they are an innocent victim of transphobia who was just getting changed?

I will probably side with the court after all this.

 

[buck]

This is the male that some on the left decided to defend... and Antifa decided to attack women over:

Merager, a registered sex offender in California for two prior convictions of indecent exposure, identifies as a woman, but law enforcement sources said that’s a ruse to get into women’s-only areas. In the Wi Spa case, Merager is accused of exposing an erect penis to four women and a minor girl.

Sources tell The Post that Merager had been banned by Wi Spa back in 2019 due to customer complaints of an erection in the women’s section, but

Merager was convicted in 2003 for looking through the window of an elderly woman’s home in Arcadia, Calif., while masturbating, illuminated by a flashlight. “I may have been somewhere I didn’t belong but I wasn’t doing it for [sexual] gratification and I wasn’t showing myself off,” Merager contests

Wi Spa suspect still at large — has history of indecent exposure and masturbation

The person charged with indecent exposure at the Wi Spa in Los Angeles is still at large, as sordid new details of their criminal record have emerged.

nypost.com

 

[bluesmoke]

It's transphobic to complain about a serial sex offender who is trans, exposing themselves to minors?

Is this really the road you want to go down?

Meager is being jailed in a women's facility. There is no prior case of exposure to a minor ever proved than the current alleged yet proved case. Meager is legally recognized in CA for admission to women's facilities. In my own personal opinion, there is something wrong here, based on the repetition of what has been evidenced, that this person ain't right. Yet I've seen folk railroaded before with me thinking they were in the wrong. And, the fact is, such people like Meager are profoundly discriminated against, and attacked, while rarely violating others and the law themselves. In the favor of Trans, this person needs justice. Meaning, if guilty, sent away and such justice supported by the queer community. If not, we follow the law that supports Meager and others participation in society as they see themselves.

 

[ClaraD]

Your claim that this person has been convicted and charged multiple times just for getting changed is absurd.

Tamara Lave, a University of Miami law professor and former public defender in California, said that prosecutors in indecent exposure cases have to prove a defendant not only “willfully exposed” themselves in front of others, but that the person did so with the intention of arousing themselves or sexually offending another individual.

“If somebody goes into a spa and sits naked in the tub, and all they are trying to do is relax, the fact that they are naked in public is not enough for them to be guilty of a crime,”

LAPD said that five individuals had come forward, and that the department “conducted interviews of victims and witnesses, reviewed the evidence, and ultimately corroborated the allegations of indecent exposure”.

Merager has been a registered sex offender since 2006, police said, and has a history of previous indecent exposure charges. Merager was convicted of indecent exposure in LA in 2002 and 2003, and pleaded not guilty to seven counts of indecent exposure in an alleged December 2018 case, according to court records. That case is still open.

it hasn't been that long ago, that there was a huge fight over which bathroom trans folks could use, here in the US...so, yes, it is feasible this person has been convicted multiple times for simply using the restroom they identify with or being in a changing room they identify with. I am not saying that is the case...but in this instance, they were in a female dressing room and the person is trans and identifies as female...

 

[Aristaeus]

it hasn't been that long ago, that there was a huge fight over which bathroom trans folks could use, here in the US...so, yes, it is feasible this person has been convicted multiple times for simply using the restroom they identify with or being in a changing room they identify with. I am not saying that is the case...but in this instance, they were in a female dressing room and the person is trans and identifies as female...

The person claims to be trans. Seems like the police authorities believe this person uses that as an excuse to gain access to female spaces.

 

[ClaraD]

The person claims to be trans. Seems like the police authorities believe this person uses that as an excuse to gain access to female spaces.

the police can claim whatever they want...if the person says they are trans, it is up to the police to show that they aren't.