Sharon Brackett & Jillian Weiss @drjilliantweiss @SharonBrackett @PointFoundation @GLCCB @GenderRightsMD (USA)

Sharon Brackett with Presidential hopeful Martin O'Malley
Sharon Brackett with Presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley at Creating Change, 2012

As we previously reported, Sharon Brackett is a Man who identifies as a Woman who threw himself into transgender activism in the last few years, so much so that the perpetually ignorant GLCCB named him “activist of the year” in 2014. While “she” was busy being an “activist,” including creating (ironically) “Transparent” day to honor Men like him, she was also fighting a hotly contested divorce, alimony and custody case in which “she” did everything “she” could to avoid paying what “she” owed to “her” ex-wife and children. Brackett’s ex-wife ultimately filed four petitions for contempt due to Brackett’s unwillingness to pay what “she” owed. 

At trial, Brackett called in a favor from fellow “woman” Jillian Weiss. Weiss is a lawyer whose current career is predicated on perpetuating the myth of white heterosexual male oppression. Brackett claimed that “she” was not able to male as much money now that “she” was a “woman,” a contention that Weiss supported in court. Here is how the Court of Special Appeals talks about Weiss:

“Dr. Weiss voiced various opinions concerning the difficulties transgender male to female individuals faced in seeking employment. According to Dr. Weiss, such individuals had less than a 16.5% chance of obtaining a job appropriate to her education (Ed. Note: Brackett does not have a college degree), experience, and income history. Dr. Weiss admitted, however, that she did not know anything about the demographics of Maryland counties, and therefore did not focus her research toward any specific county in this state. Dr. Weiss also admitted that she did not know whether appellant had actually applied for a job and had been rejected because of her transgender status. The trial judge did not find Dr. Weiss’s testimony to be credible”

In contrast, Brackett’s ex-wife called a witness who testified that if Brackett has remained at “her” prior employer, “she” would have made some $500,000 a year. The court found this testimony to be credible. The court also rejected Brackett’s contention that “she” was fired because of “her gender change.”Indeed, the court noted that Brackett left “her” job in part to avoid “her” obligations to “her” family:

“(B)ased on the timing of (Brackett’s) decision to leave the employ of The PTR Group, coupled with the fact that (“Brackett) had almost never paid her support obligations on time prior to rejecting The PTR Group’s job offer, it can be inferred, legitimately, that (Brackett) left The PTR Group with an intent to limit her child support and alimony obligations.”

The court also noted Brackett’s  blatant disregard of the cout’s orders to pay what was owed justified the finding of contempt:

“(Brackett) claims that the trial judge’s prior orders required (Brackett) to go into debt in order to pay court ordered support. This is not true. As mentioned earlier, she failed to pay alimony and child support even though she had more than enough money on hand to do so. Also, rather than pay support due, (Brackett) prepaid her rent in the amount of $42,000.00 for one year and paid her lawyer large sums. Additionally, while she was delinquent in her 10 alimony and child support payments, (Brackett) paid the expenses to start two non-profit entities, Gender Rights Maryland and Gender Rights Maryland Foundation, paying $4,000.00 in attorney’s fees to organize those entities and $1,000.00 to fund the bank accounts for those organizations. In the summer of 2011, (Brackett) gave $500.00 to Christy Lee Polis, a stranger who is transgender. Also in the summer of 2011, she donated $775.00 to a school in Ghana. In sum, she paid alimony and child support when and in the amount she pleased in disregard of the relevant orders.”

Brackett v. Brandow