This is who the leftists defend

A Xenia County judge in Ohio ruled that trans woman Rachel Glines did not commit indecent exposure in a female changing room after the defense argued that body fat covered the genitalia area.

Xenia Municipal Court documents originally reported three charges of indecent exposure against Glines, who previously went by the name Darren, since 2021. Witnesses claimed in these incidents that women, including some ********, saw a “naked man” in the female locker room with a visible penis. The charges against Glines were then brought to court in February.

Judge David McNamee eventually cleared Glines of these charges, insisting that there was “little dispute as to the facts of the case” regarding Glines’ permission to be in the locker room as well as the fact that Glines’ heavy body set likely covered the penis.

‘There is no question that [Glines] was in the women’s locker room. However, [Glines] was not charged with trespass, nor was [Glines] charged with being in an area of the YMCA where [Glines] was not supposed to be,” McNamee wrote. “Quiet simply, the facts do not exist to support a find of guilt, as charges. Glines’ genitalia was not visible as a result of other portions of her body covering same.”

This comment reflected questioning made by defense attorneys for Glines who similarly argued that it was “also fair to say that the whole genital area was covered by body fat.” The attorneys also noted that the YMCA of Greater Dayton had previously given permission for Glines to enter the women’s locker room in all YMCA facilities in the area.

I don't defend that woman for being fat. But that fat defended her twig and berries from the eyes of others.

Interesting case. Thanks for sharing.

Women don’t have a penis, so there’s that. I might actually go along with “they” pronouns on this guy, since it appears he ate a couple people.

I don't defend that woman for being fat. But that fat defended her twig and berries from the eyes of others.

Interesting case. Thanks for sharing. Originally Posted by HDGristle

Well first that is NOT a woman. Biology 101.

Second, you do defend that freaks right along with other deranged trannies to invade woman's restrooms and locker rooms and expose themselves to women

The Judge disagreed as far as the law, the permission for her to be there, and the pronouns. Take it up with the court.

The Judge disagreed as far as the law, the permission for her to be there, and the pronouns. Take it up with the court. Originally Posted by HDGristle

I am not talking about the judge. I am talking about the tranny lovers who defend this insanity.

You and others have defended that freaks right along with other deranged trannies to invade woman's restrooms and locker rooms and expose themselves to women. Why do you hate women do much to subject them to this invasion of privacy?

The judge can call him a albino kangaroo if he wants, he’d still be just a fat weirdo.

The judge can call him a albino kangaroo if he wants, he’d still be just a fat weirdo. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Not only that, he would be a HE - not a SHE. And these are the type of freaks the tranny lovers think should be able to go into any women's restroom, locker room, etc. to get their rocks off.

Why do all these leftist tranny lovers hate women so much?

They don’t hate women, they hate truth.

I am not talking about the judge. I am talking about the tranny lovers who defend this insanity.

You and others have defended that freaks right along with other deranged trannies to invade woman's restrooms and locker rooms and expose themselves to women. Why do you hate women do much to subject them to this invasion of privacy? Originally Posted by berryberry

The law disagrees with your characterizations of the events and what occurred. I know that stings, but you're stuck with the results.

I do find your taunting adorable though. Always needing to try to make it personal

They don’t hate women, they hate truth. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

I think they hate both. They certainly can't handle the truth. But why else would they want to subject women to all this bullshit.

Would they want their daughters subjected to some freak tranny watching them in the shower as the freak gets his rocks off?

The law disagrees with your characterizations of the events and what occurred. I know that stings, but you're stuck with the results.

I do find your taunting adorable though. Always needing to try to make it personal Originally Posted by HDGristle

No Gristle. You can't weasel out of your past stances. You and others have defended allowing deranged trannies the right to invade woman's restrooms and locker rooms and expose themselves to women.

That is a fact.

So why do you hate women so much?

Desperation is a stinky cologne. Thank you again for the interesting reading.

Desperation is a stinky cologne. Originally Posted by HDGristle

Thanks but we don't need to know the brand of your stinky cologne. There are some personal issues you should keep to yourself.

But on the subject of this thread, tell us again why you continue to advocate for deranged trannies having the right to invade woman's restrooms and locker rooms and expose themselves to women?

And why do you hate women so much?