Image 01 Image 03

Norfolk PD Spends $57K So Gender-Confused Male Can Shower In Women’s Locker Room

Norfolk PD Spends $57K So Gender-Confused Male Can Shower In Women’s Locker Room

The Norfolk Police Department is making women uncomfortable and feel excluded with its ‘inclusion’ policy for gender-confused men.

The Norfolk Police Department reportedly spent $57,000 renovating a women’s locker room so that a gender-confused male could shower and dress in the same facilities.

The renovations came after police officers raised concerns about an unnamed male’s use of the female locker room, according to the Independent Women’s Forum.

According to the work order, contractors were to add “toilet partitions,” “shower drying area partitions,” and carry out other modifications.

While the city has not acknowledged that the renovations are due to the presence of a male in the women’s locker rooms, the changes closely followed a controversy on the police force.

IW Features reported:

The renovation came after an alleged incident in the Norfolk PD when a transgender-identified male recruit entered the women’s locker room and stared at [Officer Meghan Grabow] when she was undressed, as IW Features previously reported. The department also allegedly demanded that officers address the male recruit as a female and use female pronouns. When officers attempted to gain clarity, the department reportedly retaliated by suspending officer Grabow and firing officer Martin Powers when he stood with female officers.

A former civilian police employee provided the women’s group with the documents which she obtained via a public records request.

Greta Sanchez said she spoke out at a city council meeting about the problems with letting men into a female-only space but “was met with disdain.”

She met the same apathy in November 2024 when she returned with more questions.

“They told me my questions were ridiculous, even though [department employees] were getting daily emails from the department that the locker room was going to be closed because of renovations,” Sanchez told IW Features. “When I asked why they weren’t demolishing the male locker room, they told me that [my] questions are ridiculous.”

The police force is proud of its “inclusion” policy, boasting about its “historic leap towards equality and fairness within the LGBTQ+ community,” in April 2020.

As summarized by the Independent Women’s Forum, the policy “requir[es] officers to address transgender-identified individuals with ‘preferred pronouns'” and “[forbids] officers from questioning an individual’s ‘gender identity’ unless ‘legally necessary.'”

The policy also allows a gender-confused male to ask a female officer to pat him down.

Sanchez says these insane policies must be stopped: “This is going to spread across our little area if we don’t do something about it.”

[Featured image via Greta Sanchez and Independent Women’s Features]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


 
 0 
 
 8
ztakddot | June 4, 2026 at 7:50 pm

Enjoy what you voted for.


 
 0 
 
 2
CommoChief | June 4, 2026 at 8:51 pm

Should make for an interesting city council meeting, assuming the AWFLs and their beta husbands or boyfriends who voted in officials that promote these sorts of Cray Cray policies can set aside their suicidal empathy long enough to ask grown up questions. Who approved it? Who reviewed it? Why didn’t they announce this immediately? Were they trying to hide it? Wjat else is being hidden? What accounts/project was drained to fund it? Was there an extra $60K laying unused in the budget? How much more ‘extra’ $ is laying around? What other Cray Cray crap did they fund? When’s the outside independent audit? What’s the potential legal liability for this policy? Did city legal dept/Attorney sign off? Did the IN policy premiums increase? Have any employees resigned? How’s morale in the dept as a result? Are there other actual or potential secondary/tertiary costs so far undisclosed such as increased costs to train replacement officers/staff or retention bonuses? Early retirement? Higher # of disability claims?


 
 0 
 
 6
Olinser | June 4, 2026 at 9:11 pm

Lets see.

Norfolk – mass blue area
Police department – police unions have massively supported Democrats for decades
Women – if women just went to voting 50-50 Democrat they would cease to exist as a party.

Yeah, I don’t care.

Enjoy what you voted for, blue ladies. Let me know when you plan to change your voting habits and stick up for yourselves.


 
 0 
 
 1
TrickyRicky | June 4, 2026 at 10:38 pm

What the actual hell?
It seems that every day is more maddening than the one before. I’m trying hard to not believe that we are falling into a deep, dark pit at terminal velocity. It’s difficult to imagine what particular straw will ultimately break the camel’s back.


 
 0 
 
 2
MK Ultra | June 4, 2026 at 11:22 pm

The Maryland Insanity virus spread across Virginia far more quickly than I expected.


 
 0 
 
 1
MAJack | June 5, 2026 at 11:04 am

We really need to “Make Mental Hospitals Great Again”.

This nonsense must end.


 
 0 
 
 0
Hodge | June 5, 2026 at 12:01 pm

MAJack – quite seriously, the current rule is that we can’t incarcerate people without consent unless they are a danger to themselves or others.

I respect that…however I think we need to examine exactly what constitutes a danger to others.


     
     0 
     
     0
    CommoChief in reply to Hodge. | June 5, 2026 at 5:06 pm

    Along with danger to ‘self’. Common sense would go a long way to restore balance and potential liability will discourage overly zealous use of involuntarily commitment particularly if there’s a 72 hold for evaluation as the first step. Somewhere in this process there’s also gotta be liability or at least accountability for letting loose a whacko. I’d suggest if a particular mental health professional or program/facility develops a pattern of releasing folks as ‘not crazy/dangerous’ who go on to commit offenses that their professional credentials be revoked.

Common sense has left the building. More staff will leave. Anyone that is serious about a career in LE will not apply.


 
 0 
 
 0
Rufus | June 5, 2026 at 3:17 pm

As a retired LEO I can’t imagine the screwed up policies at that department. If I were a copper at Norfork PD I’d be looking to lateral to another agency with more sane leadership. There’s no turning that ship around any time soon.


 
 0 
 
 0
Ironclaw | June 5, 2026 at 6:09 pm

Or they could have followed the science and recognized biology and to the MAN to use the men’s room like everyone else with a dick. Would have avoided the waste of $60k in taxpayer money.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.