The other thread is closed, or I’d have simply updated that.
Five felony counts of indecent exposure have been filed against Darren Merager for the events on Jun 23, 2021. Merager has had multiple felony charges in the past, and has been classed as a sex offender for many years.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-09-02/indecent-exposure-charges-filed-trans-woman-spa
Thanks Helena.
Does anyone know if Darren Meragee is a cis gendered male asshat taking advantage of pro-trans rules (or attempting to do so) or truly transgendered? Article refers to Darren as “she” but she has a pretty masculine name for someone who is truly trans, and Darren was obviously to the best of my recollection from a linked article in a now-deleted post acting in a very aggressive way and has a criminal record / is a registered sex offender so it seemed likely that it may be a case of opportunism by a predator rather than true transgenderism.
Just curious.
I also have no idea what the rights are of transgender OR cis gender sex offenders and locker rooms under CA law.
confusing. what makes someone guilty of indecent exposure in a spa that allows people to expose themselves? this article is lacking in some details, but it seems like she has a history of indecent exposure, likely unrelated to being trans.
Another good question.
Did more info come out that points to aggression? I don’t remember that. I thought it was an exposed penis and that’s it.
Well, this should set things back about 20 years.
Another source that was posted in the other thread and deleted by mods (I think because of other stuff and not the linked article so I think I’m ok to mention it) quoted multiple witnesses and I can’t recall precisely what they said, but they all had similar stories and I certainly had the impression that the male-bodied person was flaunting the penis not just minding their own business.
Since the post with the link was deleted I’m not sure how to find it now. It’s conceivable that my recollection is flawed.
BTW, I edited my post to clarify.
Probably. That’s the problem with “no questions asked” policies. You get opportunistic asshats who will take advantage. Every single time.
See: service animals
so, 50/50 that she is trans, but seems pretty certain she’s an asshat.
It may be too that the charge is related to behavior rather than the body type involved.
I don’t know the legal facts here. But it must be possible to indecently expose yourself to people with the same genitals.
And even in a locker room, I could imagine certain types of behavior that would be out of the norm even for a locker room and might qualify as well.
Perhaps. I also don’t know how the rules may differ for registered sex offenders vs people with no sex-related criminal offenses.
I had to check my state:
- A person who exposes the person’s genitals or pubic area to another not the person’s
spouse, …, commits a
serious misdemeanor if all of the following apply:
a. The person does so to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either party.
b. The person knows or reasonably should know that the act is offensive to the viewer.
The things I learn here …
Consider males who get charged/convicted for exposing themselves to kids (both genders) . . . I don’t think you were including this scenario with your comment . . . but . . .
How do you get the the latimes article linked in the OP if you aren’t a subscriber?
Here is an article from the NYPost. There are others. This one says they exclusively spoke with Darren.
Re-reading this… this is undoubtedly true. Particularly since California law protects the rights of all* male-bodied persons who wish to use the women’s facilities to do so.
*Unless there is some sort of applicable exception for or parole condition placed upon sex crime convicts. Like… if a cis-man is convicted of some sort of crime involving young boys… when he’s released from prison and a registered sex offender is he free to just spend his days lounging in the men’s locker room of the local YMCA? Or is there some rule that says he’s not allowed to do that?
It will be interesting to see if Darren Merager was violating parole by merely being present in the women’s locker room or if it was specific behavior in the locker room that resulted in the charges or both.
Yeah the title reads like they’re doing this intentionally. But they’re defending themselves by suggesting they’re being routinely discriminated against, resulting in charges. Worse, the complainant makes themselves sound like a phobe.
Results unclear. Not enough data.
So on the “true transwoman or opportunistic predator” question…
Yeah I’m going with opportunistic faker and not trans at all.
One of the various articles mentioned that the women filing complaints noted that Merager was “partially erect”.
