Team Raelynn

Hi all, I'm just making a new pinned post.

This blog is a place for three trans prisoners to share their experiences. We started when Jaina and Ashley were unfairly punished and we asked the community for help. You can read more about that here. Now Jaina, Ashley, and Pharaoh are sharing their experiences and art here.

Jaina (she/her) is a trans woman with a passion for writing, dungeon and dragons, Rick and Morty, and crafting creative boxes out of items she can get in prison. She and Ashley have unofficially adopted each other as sisters.

Ashley (she/her) is also a trans woman who runs the D&D games (as well as pathfinder), plays Magic the Gathering (with playing cards that have the MtG card text written on them, a popular game at the prison), draws, paints, and loves video games. Check out her deviant art here.

Pharaoh (they/them) is a gender nonconforming person who loves drawing, painting, gardening, drag, and motorcycles. They cook meals for the three of them with what the three of them can purchase with their limited funds. You can purchase Pharaoh's art at enbywerewolf's etsy store.

This blog is run by @enbycarp. I'm a nonbinary trans guy (they/he) who is penpals with all three of the blog contributors. My art blog is @enbywerewolf

RFK Jr. is pushing to get sweeping access to healthcare records. The stated goal is to study whether vaccines cause autism, they do not, and so of course everyone is jumping into that argument, but that's a smokescreen. They want us to think that this is just more RFK Jr. nonsense which will lead to outlandishly unscientific studies which can later be debunked, but it's a bait and switch.

The REAL reason the federal government wants to harvest our health records is so that they can compile lists of gender diverse people.

A.I. could allow billions of medical documents to be scoured for a variety of indicators which might reveal that a person is transgender.

Then the names could be cross referenced with driver's license data to acquire photos of the named people, and THEN the names and photos of those individuals could be blasted out to the internet outing every transgender person in the country. The list could even be sorted by state, and potentially even by county so that the individuals would be easier to find.

Oh, but why would anyone want to do such a thing?!

Gender diverse people represent 1% to 2% of the population, a portion of the population which is highly motivated to vote democrat.

There are all sorts of groups out there who hate gender diverse people and want to do us harm.

Those groups are all under the impression that as long as their actions are in service to Trump's agenda, all will be forgiven.

Trump has made very clear that his agenda is to erase the existence of transgender and gender diverse people.

He has also made it clear that he wants to regulate voting, and force everyone to physically appear at a polling place.

Talked to someone from the records department here at SCCC. It was a resolutions interview about the Gender marker in OMNI.

DOC employees seem largely under the impression that the new settlement with DRW gives them another 30 months to get in compliance. So, you know, why rush? They got another 30 months before they have to stop hurting people with their discriminatory practices.

Recently, Stafford Creek Corrections Center quit providing trash bags to the incarcerated. I believe the true intent was to save money, and the feigned altruistic intent was to reduce plastic waste. As you may expect, this has devolved into a colossal disaster.

Previously, trash was collected in receptacles with can liner trash bags. When the cans were full, unit porters would collect the bags and pod officers would escort them out the back door of the unit to put the trash in a chain of dumpsters, which were picked up several times per week to be taken out to the recycling area to be sorted and recycled.

The new process involves the same big grey plastic trash cans, WITHOUT can liners, which then get emptied into bigger black plastic trash bins, which porters roll out the front door down to the hub access point twice daily on weekdays. This process has resulted in every plastic bin involved reeking of garbage ooze.

In addition to the sanitation problem with the trashcans themselves, weekends have become particularly problematic. The dumpsters out back are still there. So, when everything fills up on the weekends we take trash out that way, but as of today it seems that the dumpsters haven't been emptied in several weeks, so they are now overflowing with loose garbage from hundreds of people.

It's all a mess. It's all unsanitary. And as the weather warms up, it's all going to smell obscene, and attract unmanageable infestations of insects.

So, that's how DOC is saving money these days.

I wonder if this is a system they learned from their state funded trips to Norway as part of the "Washington Way" initiative or whatever the fuckshit they were spinning about trying to improve conditions and culture in prisons.

Norway has a lower recidivism rate than we do, so the state legislature appropriated money a few years ago for a program to change some things about the way our prisons operate, the goal being to make our prisons more like Norwegian prisons with the hope that such changes might reduce the recidivism rate here in Washington. From what I can tell, most of the money was spent sending DOC staff on trips to Norway to see their prisons, and no substantial changes were ever made to the way WA DOC operates. Excluding perhaps the ultra uncomfortable loveseats, that were added to every dayroom to give inmates the pleasure of being reminded of what it feels like to be seated in the back of a squad-car, while receiving infractions for sitting too close to one another in said squad-car-loveseats.

Anything they claim to have changed is likely just policy adjustments that conform written policy to the status quo of what was already taking place within these fences.

I wanna talk about strip searches.

So, apparently there is a bill which just passed here in the State of Washington, I dunno what the bill says I haven't bothered to read it, but it had to do with gender and searches in prison.

This has been a point of contention for quite some time, and Disability Rights Washington has been pushing on this issue.

There is a document DOC has us (transgender individuals) sign, in this document it declares the gender of the officers one would prefer to have performing necessary strip searches.

I have marked male. I did this because my expectation is that none of these male officers is gonna give a shit about performing strip searches on me, whereas, I have heard time and again about female officers being supremely annoyed at being required to strip search transwomen. So, it is in my file that I prefer to be searched by men.

In reality, I don't care about the gender of the person searching me, because it's a stranger looking at me naked, it's going to be unpleasant regardless, it's necessary, get on with it, whatever.

DOC has been so pelted with complaints over searches, that many officers have (for years) have assumed that I prefer to be searched by women. So, when I go out on medical trips, they assign a female to the transport team specifically to be there for that purpose. In this situation I typically just let the woman search me rather than make the whole thing more awkward by starting a conversation about it, because like I said, whatever.

On other occasions, such as events in the visitation area, or coming in from Correctional Industries, when male officers realize there is a transwoman needing to be searched, they begin scrambling to find a female officer to do the search, and I have to interrupt them to tell them, "you can search me, I signed a paper saying that it's OK for men to search me, just do the search, it's fine."

I have been strip searched hundreds of times by dozens of officers of various genders, and never once have I felt that the officer searching me was being anything other than professional. I'm not discounting the possibility that transwomen have been mistreated by male officers in strip search situations, but my point is that the vast majority of officers are very professional about strip searches.

So, I really wish transwomen and allies would quit acting like cross gender strip searchs are inherently offensive or violative.

If an officer of any gender is acting inappropriately I encourage my sisters to speak out about THAT SPECIFIC OFFICER, but stop projecting that problem onto all the male officers in DOC, as if simply by being male and searching you they have caused you some injury.

The fact is, there are bigger more important battles to fight. Anyone focused on the relevance of gender in strip searches needs to examine their priorities, because there are transwomen STILL being denied access to medically necessary gender affirming care.

(Jaina and I don't always agree on things like this. Jaina has her priorities: she's being denied gender affirming surgery at this time. But I responded in this case:

totally get your point of view about strip searches: if I was being forced to undergo that indignity, it wouldn't matter to me the gender of the person doing it either. But, I also recognize that people on the outside get to decide who sees them naked all the time. Like, you can decide the gender of your docotor (especially gynecologists). Again, I've never personally cared, but I think that a person's right to autonomy includes them having a right to decide who sees them naked.

So, I asked the records department here at SCCC to comply with the settlement agreement with Disability Rights Washington in that they have the Offender Management Network Information system (OMNI) stop displaying my gender as "Male" and as I have requested in writing that it display "Female" in accordance with how I identify and present.

The response was: "…this is a male facility…"

In addition to implying that the location of my incarceration determines my gender (which then becomes immutable), this position is in overt defiance of an agreement before the court.

Bastion of liberalism Washington State, protecting Trans Rights, with the small exception of anyone incarcerated, in which case one may as well live in Trumpville USA.

For the record, I have never requested to be moved to a female facility. This is partly because of the blanket accusations being levied against ALL transwomen in the recent lawsuit filed against the state for allowing transwomen at WCCW, which essentially alleges that all transwomen are predators.

I saw those sorts of unfounded accusations from coming from a long way off, and decided against subjecting myself to that sort of categorical attack. Avoiding unnecessary conflict is not cowardice, it is prudence. Asking to go to WCCW doesn't seem like a good idea for me at this juncture, especially since I have less than 3 years left to serve.

Besides, I already defended myself from physical attack by multiple assailants in this "male facility", which earned me a reputation as "not an easy target". I wear that reputation like armor. I'm not saying that makes me completely safe here, but in the current political climate, I would rather get jumped again than be a political clay pigeon for conservative skeet shooting. Better the devil I know, than the one I don't.

So, I was told that because I am at a "male facility", the OMNI will continue to label me as male, and "this issue will not be addressed again."

I happen to know that even the transwomen at WCCW have a "male" label in their OMNI profile, so the REAL reason that mine also still says "male" is because I was assigned male at birth, and certain employees of the State of Washington refuse to acknowledge that gender is a mutable characteristic, and that assigned sex is MEDICAL information.

Those employees are refusing to comply with agreements before the courts of this State. I call on the executive to enforce the agreement.

I will (for the time being) withhold the names of the DOC employees making these statements and refusing to take action, because at this time I am pursuing administrative remedy regarding this issue, but the real remedy is to alert elected officials, that people in their employ are making them look CONSERVATIVE.

In the spirit of celebrating staff appreciation day (which has us on lockdown with no recreation or regular programming for most of the day) I'm going to point out some inappropriate behavior by a Corrections Sergeant.

I was on my way to breakfast this morning when in passing, I overheard the Sgt. say something to the affect of "…that tranny fat-ass…" I didn't catch the entire sentence, but I knew exactly of whom he was speaking, and it was clearly not me, nor was it directed at me. So, I looked that direction just enough to identify the speaker, and then kept on pushing. He was obviously complaining to other staff about a particular person whom everyone knows is a troublemaker.

Later, on my way out of the chow hall, I caught another snippet of him continuing to run his mouth about this inmate, to a different group of staff.

Again, I said nothing, not from a place of cowardice, but because the breezeway was not the appropriate forum for this reprimand.

Sir, I will enumerate my points for brevity.

We all know that inmate is problematic, but their gender identity and their body weight are not relevant. What makes them problematic are the specific articulable behaviours they exhibit, which I encourage you to document using respectful language, and without insinuating that all gender diverse people act that way.

It is irresponsible of you to use that derogatory slur whilst in earshot of inmates. By doing so, you create a permission structure for inmates whom would discriminate against a vulnerable population. Your position of authority comes with the responsibility of setting a good example. Inmates follow your example of what language is acceptable. Your bigotry is contributing to an atmosphere of hate which makes gender diverse people less safe within these fences, and I invite you to stop doing that.

This morning on the way back from breakfast I got pulled over. The cop called me guy, then stammered when it became apparent that I was NOT going to respond to an incorrectly gendered generic identifier. He became clearly flustered at struggling to just call me "miss" then apologized for the blunder and asked what I had in my coat pocket. I produced a carton of milk from said pocket proclaiming "my milk" to which he politely explained that I could not return to my unit with said milk. I surrendered the milk and carried on my way, turning my back on yet another apology, presumably this time, for taking the milk, but possibly also for the previous misgendering.

It was a sad moment. This guy is representative of a portion of the population which has lost the ability to think for themselves. He has to know, deep down that there's no rational explanation for why he needs to confiscate that little paper carton of milk, and yet he does it anyway, even after accidentally insulting me.

He does it because he's that kid that used to be a target of the bullies, but somewhere along the way realized that if he plays the part of the bully he can stand with them instead of standing against them, and that's just safer isn't it? So, he goes through the motions of being a bully, but his heart just isn't in it, so he says sorry after he gut punches you and takes your lunch money.

He does it because he's afraid that another bully might come along and question whether he is being mean enough to remain accepted amongst bullies.

He does it because he was told it's important. Someone told him an outlandish and embellished tale of how that carton of milk could bring down the whole empire, and (while he doesn't really believe it) the explanation seems plausible enough to justify nodding and following orders like a good little stormtrooper.

Alas!

Someone got stabbed in our unit today (Saturday 9th of May). It's a rarity in minimum security, but it happens every other year or so, and when it does, it's a stark reminder of where I am.

This one was bad, really bad, we don't know yet if he's going to survive. He goes by L. I didn't really hang around him much, because I keep my circle of friends rather small, and I didn't care for the company he kept, but he's an artist, and all the artists here at Stafford tend to know of each other to some degree. That's how I know him.

There is so much trivial shit DOC calls "safety and security risks" but at the end of the day, there's not much to prevent the real dangers of this place. Deterrents and incentives don't work on some people, and no matter what rules and restrictions are applied, people will always find a way to hurt others if that's what they want to do.

DOC will never openly recognize the primary threat of violence within this place, which is the stigmatization of people because of their past. Inmate culture stigmatizes and shuns people who have done things they find abhorrent, because American culture at large does the same.

I truly do not know how we change that, but it needs to change, because healing, personal growth, and recovery cannot blossom from a place of social isolation.

I hope L is going to be okay, because no matter what he did in the past, he didn't deserve this, no one does. He deserved a chance to heal from whatever wounds he had from past trauma, wounds which caused him to hurt others. I hope the guy who stabbed him gets a chance to heal and grow as well, because he too must have trauma in his past which is unresolved.

It's OK to be wary of people with darkness in their past, but when we stop giving people the opportunity to demonstrate growth and change, we forsake their humanity.

Just shouting into the void.

edit:

Correction: I do not know for certain that L was stabbed, I am assuming it based on the amount of blood and that he was reportedly airlifted to the hospital. Also, there was rumor that it was a stabbing, but in any case, he was clearly injured very badly.

I would also note that (while I have speculated as to motive) I'm not in the head of the guy who did this, but I do know that violence in prison is typically initiated for only a limited number of reasons, and the scratching of heads (by administration, as to why this happened) indicates that it was likely NOT about drug money/gambling debts, and definitely not about snitching, which leaves: disrespect, and vigilantism. Battles over disrespect are not typically so bloody outside of gang warfare, and if this were gang related, administration wouldn't be scratching their heads about it. So, my assumption is vigilantism.

DOC and GHC are so dug in on their wasteful practices regarding Adult Basic Education, that they actually threatened the job of one of their best employees for allegedly blowing the whistle on their embezzlement scheme.

Yes, embezzlement, that's what it is. The legislature appropriated money for the education of inmates because education is known to affect the recidivism rate via employability. It is literally a factor in the "Washington One" which is a system by which the state attempts to mathematically determine a person's risk level to the community. The "Washington One" system is busted, and I'll get into that fiasco another time, but suffice it to say the state is fully aware that a high school diploma drastically increases employment opportunity thereby reducing a major factor which contributes to crime, I.e. poverty.

DOC's mission is to create safer communities. "Maximize benefit to the public" is not just a line the legislature put in the RCW because it sounds good. It is a duty placed upon the stewards who collect paychecks as part of the incarceration system. Tax dollars are provided with the expectation that they will be used appropriately.

A follow up to my blog about the Basic Skills/HS+ problem (go read that entry if you haven't, it will enrage you).

So, another problem is that DOC Policy requires that GHC retrieve transcripts for anyone who has completed some high school, because the credits a student already has,can be used to shorten the HS+ program, requiring that they only cover the areas of study they did not already cover in High School. GHC is doing this, but they are placing people in the class BEFORE retrieving their transcripts, which is not in keeping with policy. Again, this is wasteful of State resources, because without those transcripts, some students are either just sitting in class not doing any work because they are waiting on transcripts, or potentially doing schoolwork for which they are already credited.

Now, the following is uncorroborated, BUT allegedly, when someone brought all this to GHC and DOC admin, and explained to them that these administrative decisions were decreasing the graduation rate of the program, according to my source, someone in GHC Administration said "well we keep their progress so they can finish when they come back"

Let that sink in…

When they come back, TO PRISON.

In other words, the plan is, we waste state resources in ways that actually decrease the graduation rate, like having people in the course who don't have time to complete it, or placing them before getting their HS transcripts, thereby releasing MORE people without Diplomas, where we expect them to re-offend, and we can charge the state more money when we put that person back in the program.

DOC policy 500 and the referenced RCWs are in agreement about prioritizing referrals based on release date. HOWEVER, RCW contains language about "maximum benefit to the public", which is conspicuously absent from DOC policy.

Why is this important? I'll tell you.

In the application of policy, Gray's Harbor College administrators have decided that "prioritize based on… expected release date" literally means that whoever gets out soonest gets placed in the program first (the program is mandatory if one is placed in it).

This sounds reasonable until you find out that credits from the program are nontransferable. That means it doesn't count for anything unless one completes the entire program and achieves their High School Diploma.

Still don't get it?

The program takes about 9 months on average. So, if someone is 3 months to release when they start, there's almost no chance they can get their diploma before their release. Now, that doesn't mean they won't learn anything, but the purpose of the program is to increase employability to thereby reduce recidivism and that means the Diploma is EVERYTHING.

The reason this is such a problem is that there are a limited number of spots in the program, and people are being forced to participate whom cannot benefit from it.

If a person with 3 months until release is taking up a spot, that means a person with 6 months until release is waiting. They may have had time to complete, but by the time they get a spot, they too are left without sufficient time to graduate, and this problem perpetuates ad nauseum.

This is a policy/law interpretation problem. There are other factors policy and law tells them to consider when prioritizing placement in the adult basic education program. Also, anyone with half a brain could reason that prioritizing based on expected release date includes NOT placing people in the program if their expected release date is too soon for them to receive the primary benefit from the program I.E. the diploma.

Follow the money. The incentive structure is always a part of the problem. The administrators for the college are going to do the simplest thing that meets the incentive, which is of course, profits for the college. Profits for the college are based on participation not graduation. It's only about butts in seats to them, not graduation rate. So, there is no incentive for them to interpret the policy in a way that would actually provide maximum benefit to the public.

The result is that DOC and GHC are wasting state resources by operating this program inefficiently, in a way that does not maximally benefit the public.

The solution? GHC administration should interpret DOC policy in a way which is more consistent with RCW language regarding maximizing benefit to the public. In so doing, a relevant factor which should be considered when prioritizing placement in ABE/High School Plus is whether a person's ERD provides sufficient time for them to received their diploma.

That would be good practice and consistent with the law.

"100 Nights of Hero" is my new favorite movie.

Whoever is writing the headline banner for CNN has clearly figured out that they are short for that job, because the IDGAF attitude reads through every Trump headline:

"Trump declares Iranian forces obliterated as Iran launches new strikes"

"Iranian officials want to open diplomatic channels, Trump not ready."