http://addictinginfo.org/2017/01/19/trump-to-cut-dojs-25-violence-against-women-grants-and-programs/
trump-to-cut-dojs-25-violence-against-women-grants-and-programs/
But you know, his obvious disrespect towards women is totally just locker room talk.
Also,
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-18/the-empty-trump-administration
Trump has only nominated 28 of the 690 positions that need to be confirmed by the senate and, you know, make the government run. (He should have been at about 100 by now.)
First of all, the government actually does things, and without all the jobs filled it's not apt to do them very well. Even if there's no catastrophic failure, lack of leadership will, as should be no surprise, yield inertia and low morale, leading to steadily worse performance.
When it comes to policy, Trump will be only a vague presence in the executive branch during the months when presidents normally have the best chance to get things done. It's not news to anyone that bureaucrats are skilled in resisting the preferences of presidents. But an entrenched bureaucracy against a secretary (and in most cases, a secretary with little government experience or little policy expertise or both) and a bunch of empty desks? That's no contest. Congress and interest groups may still have plenty of clout inside the departments and agencies, but Trump, at least until he has some people there, will have little.
So maybe based on pure incompetance a Trump presidency won't be so bad, as they don't actually have anyone in place to do anything or that knows anything.