"He was gay and he hit on me" is now an acceptable excuse for murder?

[mjules]

A friend of mine on LiveJournal linked to this post (which is rife with other informative links, making everything available in one nice, tidy bundle for me to link to) about how a man in Crothersville, Indiana was brutally murdered by two teenage boys, whose statement in defense of themselves included the excuse that he was gay (though there seems to be evidence pointing to the fact that he actually wasn't) and that he hit on them (which is dubious at best).

The story is here: http://bookshop.livejournal.com/834653.html (Be warned that it does include some graphic details concerning the way in which he was killed.)

The scariest parts?

1) Apparently "gay panic" is still a valid defense in a court of law.
2) Indiana STILL has no hate crime laws.
3) The press has been keeping this very, very quiet.

Alarmingly enough, I had just made an entry about this sort of issue in the notebook I'm using to keep up with related matters. (Which is also being posted at http://mjules.greatestjournal.com/ for anyone who's curious.) Despite my questioning the American state of mind on this issue, I was kind of hoping there HAD been improvement.

:'(

[tpdncr4christ]

Such a thing... so incredibly sad... so remarkably sad...

I don't believe it. I cannot believe it... but it's real.
:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:'(:' (:'(:'(:'(:'(

[sjbouza]

:sick::headbang:

That pretty much says it all from me. Whether or not he was gay, they are using it as a defense, ergo it makes it a hate crime. They perceived him as gay and that perception led to his death. They admitted it. These kids are just sick and need to be locked away for a very long time. Is this just another case of, "lets kill someone to see what it is like?" Did they have this planned out long before hand? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. I find it very suspicious that the one kids father is the county coroner, how the hell could he have missed all that blood in his house? There needs to be someone else brought in to examine the body.

I am enraged and dumbfounded.

[mjules]

I find it very suspicious that the one kids father is the county coroner, how the hell could he have missed all that blood in his house? There needs to be someone else brought in to examine the body.

I am enraged and dumbfounded.


I found that very suspicious as well, and I think that it may be one reason the press has been so hush-hush about it all. Connections, anyone?

:tdown:

[Zerbie]

The saddest part of all this for me is that my reaction to the entire situation was, "Oh, *this* again." I've seen cover-ups before, we've all seen gay panic defense before. . . twinkies, anyone? (and the Twinkie Defense was before I was born!!) Unbelievable that this still can work.

Yes, it's a poster-story for why we need hate crimes legislation. And educational programs a la GLSEN.

How tragic. :'(

[antonyh]

55j7QuBtWww

[ladyinred]

[Q


The scariest parts?

1) Apparently "gay panic" is still a valid defense in a court of law.
2) Indiana STILL has no hate crime laws.
3) The press has been keeping this very, very quiet.


What they were reacting to was their own homophobia. A person in the same situation could have a totally different reaction toward the same person.It doesn't justify murder. But people who in a fit of hysteria and fear chose to do that. I guess if a man made a pass at me (being a woman) and I was offended by his behavior I should then murder him? That wouldn't hold up in a court of law would it? My reaction of course would be nothing of the sort, most likely I would avoid the person in the future or confront him on how he behaved. Self defense can only be proven if there is a life threatening behavior. Just because they felt threatened by someones homosexuality does not justify murder. They could have done something else, like said, hey dude back off, or I'm not interested or homosexual. So now tell me how murder would be justified because of "gay panic"?

There were a few times I panicked in the past when men made passes at me, I didn't kill them.( I just wanted to run the other way,LOL) it seems to me "gay panic" is a weak and flimsy defense. but this does show me how deeply homophobia has penetrated people's psyche and our society ,and who helps perpetuate and feed those fears, The religious right. But what probably really was threatened with these guys was their heterosexual masculinity.What is strange is that they equate manliness with brute force.

If the law justifies the gay "panic defense" Then perhaps anyone who is offended by someone elses behavior and panics should be justiable if they commit murder? There is no rational basis for that. If we upheld that view then alot of people would have justifiable reasons to murder wouldn't they? This reminds me of the story I read where a father killed his three year old boy because he thought he had "gay tendacies."What justifies that act? What should be questioned is why people are going off the deep end like that over homosexuality. Insanity?Why do not people see how this fear hurts everyone?
Unfortunately it seems to be the norm in society today that people have lost their rational mind and senses and have allowed fear to control their lives .The psychological trauma and distress are so prevalent in our society that even straight kids are often tormented by their peers for being "gay" and ridiculed if they don't fit into a certain sterotype of masculinity.

This is the price America pays for listening to the hysteria and fear-based rantings of religious extremists. America should weep ,it has lost it's mind. The voice of reason no longer prevails, FEAR does.This violence destroys lives and innocence. America had better wake up.Everyone is being hurt by it, including the children.Nobody will feel safe or be safe until it does stop .

[ladyinred]

[QUOTE=ladyinred;33044][Q


The scariest parts?

1) Apparently "gay panic" is still a valid defense in a court of law.
2) Indiana STILL has no hate crime laws.
3) The press has been keeping this very, very quiet.


What they were reacting to was their own homophobia. A person in the same situation could have a totally different reaction toward the same person.It doesn't justify murder. But people who in a fit of hysteria and fear chose to do that. I guess if a man made a pass at me (being a woman) and I was offended by his behavior I should then murder him? That wouldn't hold up in a court of law would it? My reaction of course would be nothing of the sort, most likely I would avoid the person in the future or confront him on how he behaved. Self defense can only be proven if there is a life threatening behavior. Just because they felt threatened by someones homosexuality does not justify murder. They could have done something else, like said, hey dude back off, or I'm not interested or homosexual. So now tell me how murder would be justified because of "gay panic"?

There were a few times I panicked in the past when men made passes at me, I didn't kill them.( I just wanted to run the other way,LOL) it seems to me "gay panic" is a weak and flimsy defense. but this does show me how deeply homophobia has penetrated people's psyche and our society ,and who helps perpetuate and feed those fears, The religious right. But what probably really was threatened with these guys was their heterosexual masculinity.What is strange is that they equate manliness with brute force.

If the law justifies the gay "panic defense" Then perhaps anyone who is offended by someone elses behavior and panics should be justiable if they commit murder? There is no rational basis for that. If we upheld that view then alot of people would have justifiable reasons to murder wouldn't they? This reminds me of the story I read where a father killed his three year old boy because he thought he had "gay tendacies."What justifies that act? What should be questioned is why people are going off the deep end like that over homosexuality. Insanity?Why do not people see how this fear hurts everyone?
Unfortunately it seems to be the norm in society today that people have lost their rational mind and senses and have allowed fear to control their lives .The psychological trauma and distress are so prevalent in our society that even straight kids are often tormented by their peers for being "gay" and ridiculed if they don't fit into a certain sterotype of masculinity.

This is the price America pays for listening to the hysteria and fear-based rantings of religious extremists. America should weep ,it has lost it's mind. The voice of reason no longer prevails, FEAR does.This violence destroys lives and innocence. America had better wake up.Everyone is being hurt by it, including the children.Nobody will feel safe or be safe until it does stop .

"Fear is hell,and there are plenty who have paved the path toward it" The bible ,"Perfect love casts out fear because fear hath torment."

[mjules]

[QUOTE=ladyinred;33044]
This reminds me of the story I read where a father killed his three year old boy because he thought he had "gay tendacies."

What the hell? Kids aren't even sexually aware at three years old, for the most part. My mind just boggles.

There was a movie once (I never got to watch it, but I want to; I'll have to look it up and see if I can find it again) where they developed a genetic test to be able to tell if a fetus had the potential to be homosexual. The movie centered around a woman who was told that her son would be born gay and the doctor offered her an abortion as an alternative to having a gay son... from what I understand, during her struggle with the decision, she found out her brother was gay as well. As I haven't seen the movie, I don't know what her end decision was (based on the cast involved - Rupert Everett and Brendan Fraser, namely - I'm guessing she got over her homophobia) but I was thinking about this the other day, how being gay is somehow thought of as this horrible, horrible thing... enough to justify killing people.

I agree with you that such a panic defense would never hold up if a woman killed a man for hitting on her, or a man killed a woman for flirting with him. And, honestly, I'm not sure it would hold up in the case of a woman hitting on a woman, since most of the legal system is comprised of men and I have yet to meet a straight man who didn't think girl on girl was "hot." It's that someone, somewhere has fed into the masculine American consciousness that being gay reduces one's intrinsic maleness.

As if.

[ladyinred]

But what is sickening is our legal system would justify the killing of a homosexual, the man in the article was said not to be homosexual, but I guess what I got from the article since the kids thought he was gay it justifies the defense of killing him which makes no sense at all.All I am saying is alot of people are going whacko over homosexuality.I mean literally bonkers to the point of even murdering someone even if they are gay or not, just that they thought someone is gay somehow justifies it. I really believe people have become mentally deranged with their homophobic views, I literally believe they have some psychosis or some other severe mental problems.Whether they believe homosexuality is wrong or not, doesn't justify killing someone. I even believe their views on manhood are deranged, being a man means being violent ,cruel, vicious and a brute,someone with no feelings or compassion for others. They are waaaaay out there.

[ladyinred]

Homosexuality itself isn't creating the violence and hate or murder . It is the homophobia that is. Now think about that. Even straight kids and straight people get murdered , harrassed , and tormented as gay if they are suspect or don't act in accordance with social norms of heterosexuality. How is this affecting people in the United States? Schools are now nightmares and hell and a battleground for many of the kids because they are being taunted, harassed, and tormented,and even murdered. Churches are now battlegrounds over peoples souls. To say this violence doesn't harm all aspects of society would be naive at best. Homophobia looms, No one wants to be seen as a "faggot" and will conform at any "costs" even if it means to the detriment of others or even to murder others. Whose terrorizing who then?

[ladyinred]

Homophobia kills:http://www.bidstrup.com/phobia.htm

[ladyinred]

Just how prevalent is violence and abuse in the heterosexual culture? This article deals with hazing on campuses.But the article is so long I'm just going to add some of the excerpts here: Pertaining to heterosexuality and violence and homphobia:

Implications & Recommendations
Attending to the cultural construction of gender, homophobia, and the influences of race and social class is key to promoting more complex understandings and developing effective solutions to the problem of hazing. Interventions in all arenas need to take gender theory into account in order to design educational and policy initiatives that will work. Speaking specifically about masculinity, anti-violence educators Jackson Katz and Jeremy Earp (2001) point out,

Making masculinity visible is the first step to understanding how it operates in the culture and how definitions of manhood have been linked, often unconsciously, with dominance and control. Making masculinity a key part of the equation is therefore step one to dealing effectively with the problem of violence in our society (p. 12).

The social construction of femininity, sexism and homophobia also need to be made visible to help draw attention to the ways in which girls/women as well as boys/men are made more vulnerable to particular types of hazing practices.

More research is needed to help sort out the ways in which hazing manifests differently as an outcome of gender and other identity differences. The vast majority of research studies on hazing have examined its occurrence among groups of white men. One unfortunate outcome of this is that definitions of hazing and policies in response to hazing often reflect hazing as it occurs in among white men primarily. While there are similarities in hazing practices across all groups, there are many differences. In her research on sorority hazing, Holmes (1999) found that many women defined hazing as “a fraternity issue involving physical activities including drinking, running and calisthenics” (p. 81). So even though these women described activities that constitute hazing (i.e. pledge drops, servitude, not allowing friendships outside the chapter and verbal abuse), they did not define it as such.
This is what I see as pertinent:
*********In my view, as a mother of three young children and a professor of education, it is exceedingly important that parents, teachers, coaches and school administrators become more aware of how rigid gender role expectations can have harmful consequences for children. Fathers in particular can do more to model an expanded version of masculinity that does not valorize aggressive sexuality and violence (Kivel, 1999). Primary and secondary schools as well as colleges and universities would be wise to expand opportunities for meaningful dialogue with students, teachers, parents and community members about the potentially harmful consequences of narrow and confining conceptualizations of gender.****************

In this chapter, I have described how rigid and narrow versions of gender work in tandem with homophobia to create environments that are more likely to tolerate and perpetuate hazing practices—and particular forms of hazing among different types of groups. If we are truly committed to circumventing the harm that is often produced through hazing, we need to become more cognizant of how gender, race, social class and other social hierarchies shape our understandings and tolerance of the role of hazing—even in light of the emotional and physical damage and sometimes lethal consequences that can result. Working to expand narrow and confining gender norms and eliminating homophobia is not only important for understanding and preventing hazing—it is an important step toward providing children (and adults) with opportunities for lives that are more fully human.

[ladyinred]

Taken from the same article but I feel it is relevant to heterosexuality and violence in our culture again even though it focuses on hazing it talks about the gender norms and functions in our society which I feel help contribute to violence: Not only colleges are affected by this, but elementary,middle, highschool, and other social institutions that are political and religious.

Studies also document how children themselves police each other’s behavior according to stereotypes (Thorne, 1997). For instance, if a young boy plays with a doll in the presence of older boys, it is likely that he will be teased and will quickly learn that having a doll is outside the bounds of acceptable masculine behavior. This is particularly troubling when one considers that having a doll is an important way for young children to develop important human qualities of nurturing and care-giving. Beginning in early childhood, boys learn to de-value activities that are associated with female-identified qualities while they simultaneously learn that rough and aggressive play are acceptable for boys as evidenced by the frequently referenced maxim “boys will be boys.”

Over the past decade there has been increased attention to the examining how dominant understandings of masculinity shape a sense of self for boys and men. For instance, Paul Kivel, in his book Boys Will Be Men (1999), describes the predominant social construction of masculinity as harmful for boys because it confines them to the “act like a man box” and prevents them from experiencing a range of emotions and thus being fully human.

Act like a man box(Couldn't paste the chart,so the below is all I have : But it can be found on the site: If you scroll down the article :http://www.stophazing.org/hazingender.htm)

The center column within the box lists the range of emotions that boys/men feel, but are often hidden because of the cultural pressures to “act like a man.” The columns on the left and right within the box are the predominant cultural norms of Western masculinity that have come to define manhood in many respects. When boys attempt to step out of the box—or reveal some of their true feelings (from the center column), they are often pushed back into the box with verbal and/or physical abuse—or the threat of these. (sissy,faggot for example) As Kivel (1999) explains,

“If we pay attention we can easily see the Box’s effects on boys. Just watch a group of them together. They are constantly challenging each other, putting each other down…testing to see who is in the Box. They are never at ease, always on guard. At an early age, most start to hide their feelings, toughen up and make a huge emotional effort not to cry. Many boys stop wearing colorful clothing or participating in activities that they think might make them vulnerable to being labeled gay…” (p. 13).

Both Kivel (1999) and Katz & Earp (1999) contend that the ways in which masculinity is currently conceptualized creates environments where boys/men are more likely to learn be aggressive and sometimes violent. William Pollack also describes the confines of masculinity in his highly acclaimed book Real Boys (1998). According to Pollack, “Studies show that boys at a very early age are pushed to suppress their vulnerable and sad feelings, they also demonstrate that boys are pressured to express the one strong feeling allowed them—anger (p. 44). He draws on the term “emotional funnel” to describe what unfortunately happens for most boys when anger becomes “the final common pathway…to express their vulnerability and powerlessness (p. 44). Importantly, these experts point out that aggressive and even violent behavior is more likely to be tolerated and/or excused precisely because gender norms are so powerful and pervasive that they are rarely questioned (Katz & Earp, 1999; Kimmel, 2001; Kivel, 1999; Pollack, 1998).

The Problem of Homophobia

It is impossible to provide an analysis of gender without attending to the role homophobia plays in reinforcing rigid and confining expectations of masculine and feminine behavior. This is clearly indicated when you ask a group of high school students to think about what happens if a man is a little bit too nurturing or a bit too emotional and they are quick to respond, “he’s a sissy,” “he’s a fag.” Women who cross the line of normative expectations for femininity face similar social consequences by being called “butch” or “dyke.” Of course, these terms are unlikely to serve as deterrents unless they are perceived negatively. Homophobia—the fear of homosexuality in oneself and/or others serves as just such a deterrent for many. These attitudes are so powerful and pervasive that they reinforce what has been termed a “gender straitjacket,” ensuring that boys and girls do not deviate substantially from culturally proscribed beliefs about appropriate behavior for men and women (Kimmel, 2000; Kivel, 1999). While a full discussion of the multiple and complex connections between gender and homophobia is outside the scope of this chapter, it is essential for any gender analysis to delineate how homophobia reinforces rigid (and sometimes harmful) expectations of acceptable behavior for girls/women and boys/men.

Those working to eliminate hazing need to be mindful of the ways in which masculinity, that is—the predominant social construction of masculinity, and homophobia, work in tandem to create a climate in which violent and demeaning hazing practices are more likely to be tolerated and even considered beneficial for young men. Gender theory provides an important lens for deepening understanding about the prevalence and persistence of hazing. In the next sections, I describe how masculinity and femininity shape particular hazing behaviors in gendered ways as well as consider how the phenomenon of hazing itself might be considered a gendered practice.

Equally disturbing:
Another gender-based difference is that groups of men are more likely than groups of women to engage in homoerotic activities as a form of hazing. When boys/men are subjected to (rather than freely entering into horseplay such as giving wedgies and wrestling), homoerotic activity it is often considered a threat to heterosexual masculine identity.******** Defending one’s heterosexuality is paramount to securing one’s status as a “real man” and homoerotic activities run the risk of threatening this status.***** In the much-publicized case of hazing on the UVM ice hockey team, an initiate sued the University alleging sexual assault after being directed to drink, eat vile substances and “parade naked holding one another’s genitals” during a team initiation (Rosellini, 2001, p. 1). Reports of activities like this are becoming increasingly common it seems and when consent is not clear, charges of sexual assault may be likely.

Interestingly, researchers have noted the seemingly paradoxical frequency of homoerotic activities in male groups that are deeply invested in sustaining highly masculinized environments (Martin & Hummer, 1989; Rhoads, 1995; Robinson, 1998). It is theorized that this may be due largely to the need for men to have socially sanctioned outlets for expressing same-sex intimacy—especially in groups where the “culture stresses a very macho conception of manhood…” and other types of physical contact and sensitivity are viewed as objectionable (Rhoads, 1995, p. 318). The sanctioning of homoerotic activities in highly masculinized environments like fraternities and male athletic teams occurs within an intensely homophobic culture. According to Rhoads (1995), the emphasis on machismo is also reflected****** in the strong disdain for gay students, whom the brothers tend to see as lacking masculinity” (p. 319). Interestingly, researchers have also noted that male groups who ascribe to very rigid and narrow definitions of masculinity (common to fraternities and male athletes) not only exhibit an intense hatred—but also fascination with homosexuality (Martin & Hummer, 1989; Sanday, 1990).

Now perhaps you see why I see homophobia rather than homosexuality as the predominant problem in our culture.Heterosexuals and homosexuals are victims of this fear.Homosexuals may be many times on the receiving end of the violence but so are heterosexual men &(boys) as well.(look at the mental and emotional consequences of their thinking and attitudes reflective of social and culture "norms", psychic and emotional trauma) But what this article shows me is that heterosexual concepts of maleness are not really so "normal" they are based more on trying to project a image of masculinity as tough, rough and aggressive based on their own inner insecurities.

[ladyinred]

I wonder if I'd make good psychologist LOL Oh well maybe not.. I tend to delve in really deep.

[ladyinred]

"What the hell? Kids aren't even sexually aware at three years old, for the most part. My mind just boggles."
The more I study psychology ,spirituality and our society.I'm convinced there are alot of sick people out there, Killing an innocent child because of what?I am convinced we live in a pretty sick society anyway.The more I look at homophobia ,it seems to me people just play into the fear and it is sickening what they will do because of that fear. To make murder and violence acceptable because of their own neurosis (or perhaps psychosis) to me sad.

[ladyinred]

And what I am trying to do is dig deeper here. what is at the heart of all this frenzied paranoia and hysteria of homosexuality. I wanted to go deeper to see what was at the root of heterosexism as well. It doesn't seem to me by what I've read in the above article and research that they are too normal either because of social norms and boxes they try to fit in,it seems there is alot of suffering in their own idenity.

[tymejumper]

A friend of mine on LiveJournal linked to this post (which is rife with other informative links, making everything available in one nice, tidy bundle for me to link to) about how a man in Crothersville, Indiana was brutally murdered by two teenage boys, whose statement in defense of themselves included the excuse that he was gay (though there seems to be evidence pointing to the fact that he actually wasn't) and that he hit on them (which is dubious at best).

The story is here: http://bookshop.livejournal.com/834653.html (Be warned that it does include some graphic details concerning the way in which he was killed.)

The scariest parts?

1) Apparently "gay panic" is still a valid defense in a court of law.
2) Indiana STILL has no hate crime laws.
3) The press has been keeping this very, very quiet.

Alarmingly enough, I had just made an entry about this sort of issue in the notebook I'm using to keep up with related matters. (Which is also being posted at http://mjules.greatestjournal.com/ for anyone who's curious.) Despite my questioning the American state of mind on this issue, I was kind of hoping there HAD been improvement.

:'(
I guess if a straight guy hits on me, a lesbian, I could murder him and use the "straight panic" defense? This just absolutely makes me ill! Another thing we have the Focus on the Family groups and AFA groups to thank for!

[tymejumper]

"What the hell? Kids aren't even sexually aware at three years old, for the most part. My mind just boggles."
The more I study psychology ,spirituality and our society.I'm convinced there are alot of sick people out there, Killing an innocent child because of what?I am convinced we live in a pretty sick society anyway.The more I look at homophobia ,it seems to me people just play into the fear and it is sickening what they will do because of that fear. To make murder and violence acceptable because of their own neurosis (or perhaps psychosis) to me sad.

I am reading a book called "the medowlark sings" about a society that is exclusively gay and that all cildren are tested for the gay gene at birth and if they have it they are shipped to this gay island. It would be of interest if they actually tell at birth. Some really sick people out there Red, that is for sure.

[ladyinred]

What is sickening is how they interpret the law. Reading the article, it is said the man was straight, not gay. And what was appalling is the brutal viciousness with which they murdered him. Self defense means doing all that was done to him?

[BrentRichards]

I guess if a straight guy hits on me, a lesbian, I could murder him and use the "straight panic" defense? This just absolutely makes me ill! Another thing we have the Focus on the Family groups and AFA groups to thank for!

Exactly! I've often had this same thought ... why do straights have the right to freak out when a gay person takes an interest in them, but I'm supposed to be flattered if a straight woman comes on to me? I've often (VERY often) heard straight guys comment on how they'd "kick his a**" if a gay man ever came on to them. How about we all just get reasonable, and say, "Thanks, but I'm gay/straight/not interested?" ... and move on!

[tymejumper]

What is sickening is how they interpret the law. Reading the article, it is said the man was straight, not gay. And what was appalling is the brutal viciousness with which they murdered him. Self defense means doing all that was done to him?

my brother is a cop and he says that self defense is only enough force used to defend yourself. meaning that if he has a gun and shoots, you can shoot too.

[wmanion]

And what I am trying to do is dig deeper here. what is at the heart of all this frenzied paranoia and hysteria of homosexuality

You can actually compare this frenzied paranoia to the witch hunts of long ago. This is another example of taking religion (not God) and pushing it to the limits to justify the actions of a group. After all, "you shall not suffer a witch to live," and if you are gay the judgment is "death." The sad truth is that in both instances, innocent lives were taken and social norms justified the actions. It is sad, indeed!