The Advocate recently published a provocative column titled Mixed Messages, on the murder of cross-dressing 15-year-old Lawrence King by a homophobic classmate, Brandon McInerney, at Oxnard, Calif.'s E.O. Green Junior High. Wrote Neal Broverman:
...each LGBT child at Casa Pacifica [a group home for abused, neglected, and emotionally troubled children where King lived] is given a "Know Your Rights Guide" provided by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, a legal advocacy group. "Queer and Trans Youth in California Foster Care Have Rights!" declares the pamphlet's cover. Inside is a description of the state's Foster Care Nondiscrimination Act, along with a list of entitlements for queer children like safe bathrooms and dating. Included on the list-below an illustration of a teenager in overalls and high heels-is the right for kids to wear clothes and hairstyles that fit their gender identity. King clearly took that freedom to heart in the last weeks of his life.
As wonderful as this encouragement sounds, did it put Larry in harm's way by sending him out in a world not ready for him? It may be beyond the capacity of kids to reconcile a tolerant atmosphere like Casa Pacifica with the xenophobic, conformist nature of school. Children like Brandon McInerney are products of their society, one that simply does not know what to do with a boy in heels.
Broverman raised serious issues that are certainly worth discussing. But his piece provoked strong criticism from certain activist quarters, as in this Open Letter to The Advocate from "lawyers, advocates, and child welfare professionals" who declare "hiding fuels hatred" and that "We cannot keep children safe by hiding them. Succumbing to fear creates an environment in which hatred thrives. Invisibility is just another, more insidious, killer."
That sounds a awful lot like the kind of sloganeering that is meant to stifle open discussion rather than foster it. Gay adults know that, if they choose, they can walk hand in hand down a street of a non-gay neighborhood-and they know that in a great many neighborhoods they will risk getting beaten (or worse) for it. That's a choice adults can make.
I think Broverman was altogether correct in pointing out that 15-year-old King, as a transgendered minor, might have been better served by adults who imparted the message that the world can be a dangerous place and unless one is able, willing and prepared to defend oneself (or makes an informed decision to accept the risks or even to court martyrdom) it may be prudent to place discretion over self-expressiveness-at least until one is able to escape entrapment in the public school system.
31 Comments for “The Lawrence King Tragedy”
posted by Doug on
Great. So now I’m not entitle to my rights unless I am prepared to defend myself. Since when do I have to carry a weapon to defend myself for exercising my rights. That’s just plain BS with a capital B. This nation is not built on anarchy it’s built on the rule of law.
posted by Sean Kinsell on
Well, Doug, what’s your solution? Laws only mean something if they can be enforced. Do you really want a law enforcement system so bloated and authoritarian that it’s watching everywhere you go and can descend upon you with lightning speed if some anti-gay nut jumps you? You only have to be isolated in a dark parking lot or alley with someone of evil intentions for seconds in order to get yourself shot or stabbed. Society can do its best to ensure that your murderer is punished, but that won’t bring you back to life.
Free societies require tradeoffs. You get to wander about at will and express yourself as you like within the law, but you have to recognize that you may find yourself in a situation in which the authorities don’t have time to rescue you. So you can either stay in safe spaces for the rest of your life or take responsibility for your own defense. Programs to teach tolerance can help make things better, but they won’t reach the messed up or thoroughly evil. And there will always be messed up and thoroughly evil people.
posted by Stefano on
Sean: Since when is being in a computer lab at school comparable to being in a dark isloated place?
It is the responsibility of us adults in those settings to ensure that students are free from bullying and violence.
In what civil society is the murder of those you dislike, simply because you dislike them, condoned? In what civil society is the attacking of those you dislike, simply because you dislike them, condoned?
No matter whether we in the US are all accepting and tolerant of the Larry Kings of the world or not is irrelevant. No amount of caution on the part of the victim is going to protect them from those who feel they are entitled to use violence against someone simply because they don’t like them. To suggest otherwise is blaming the victim. It’s the same old line about raped women “asking for it” because they were dressed provactively, etc, or the same old line about the black man asking to be lynched because he was in “the wrong part of time” or was talking to the “wrong person”.
Enough is enough!
posted by Sean Kinsell on
Stefano, Doug appeared to be addressing the general position that we should all be prepared to defend ourselves. That was what I was responding to.
You’re right that the specific environment in which King was shot does raise additional issues (oddly untouched in Broverman’s column, unless I missed something). How did McInerney get the gun onto school grounds? Was there no teacher in the computer lab when he arrived looking agitated? Were there warning signs that were missed?
And I just don’t agree with you that “no amount of caution on the part of the victim is going to protect them from those who feel they are entitled to use violence against someone simply because they don’t like them.” People can take self-defense courses, buy and learn to shoot a gun, and be cognizant of the risks they’re taking. You’re right that King was under the care of adults who were supposed to be looking out for him. That’s exactly what makes it unconscionable that they didn’t (from what advocate.com gives us to understand) do their level best to give him a sense of the risks he might be taking by being flamboyant in that environment. He thought he could handle himself, but at least one school administrator appears to have disagreed.
What you mean throwing around words such as condoned, I have no idea. McInerney should be punished to the fullest appropriate extent. I would never say otherwise. The problem is, that doesn’t bring King back, and maybe if his elders had sat him down and pointed out to him that it was impossible to supervise every student every minute of the day, that acceptance of non-conformist behavior takes time to build, and that some students at the school were seriously emotionally volatile, he might have decided to tone it down a bit until he was in an environment where acceptance was easier to ensure. I’m happy to join you in wishing life weren’t like that, but that doesn’t change reality.
posted by Leo on
I found the letters enormously disingenuous.
No one is suggesting that gay youth stay closeted, lie or hide. But idealism needs to be balanced with reality on the street.
The way a person presents them selves can in fact make them more or less vulnerable to attack. Ask anyone gay or straight who’s lived in a “marginal” neighborhood, you walk a certain way, you dress a certain way, you keep your valuables hidden, If you by a new TV or stereo you don’t leave the box on the side walk advertising that there something new and valuable in your home. You check yourself, that may not be ideal but it helps to stay off the radar.
Similarly, as a middle aged gay couple my partner and I know full well there are places right here in Manhattan where it would be ill advised for us to hold hands on the street. That’s not to suggest we’d deserve it if attacked. But as adults we can weigh the pros and cons?is that particular bit of expression, in this place, at this time so important to our identity that it’s worth the possible risks? If we decide “no” are we are now in the closet?
The notion that adjusting your self expression based on the circumstances you’re in somehow makes you, dishonest or closeted is easy to float if you’re not the one looking at an emergency room visit. Or if you spend most of your time in gay enclaves. It doesn’t take a whole lot of guts to express yourself in the Village or the Castro but a public middle school? Now that’s courage. And we should be careful about how we send LGBT kids into battle.
There was an article in the Village Voice not that long ago about LGBT youth growing up in the rougher ethnic neighborhoods of NY who in order to survive keep it toned down or on the DL when in their ‘hood. What should our advice be to these kids? Get a spine and come out? Embrace forms of expression that could get them thrown out of their homes, prompt their father to beat the shit out of them and get them jumped on the street? Is that looking after their best interests?
We need to put aside the mission statements and focus on a child’s home/school/neighborhood environment and adjust our advice accordingly. Yes we need to change the culture, but that shouldn’t entail placing LGBT kids at more risk than they already are. Children are human beings, they aren’t symbols and they aren’t placed on earth so adults can use them to prove a point. Larry King was a canary in a coal mine. A gender non-conforming youth sent into a school environment that hadn’t been primed to accept or even been civil to him.
posted by Jimbo on
I agree with the basic thrust of the article. There are some places where you have to watch your back. For example I visit Boston frequently. But I avoid going to Roxbury because there is a greater chance of me being shot at or stabbed. Call me racist (Roxbury is Boston’s biggest black ghetto), but it’s the truth. Even here in Maine (way back in 1984) there was a gay man named Charlie Howard. He was very flamboyant in Bangor. He wore makeup & earrings & carried a purse. He was eventually thrown over a bridge downtown & drowned. I’m not condoning his death & wish the 3 teenage boys who murdered him had stiffer penalties put upon them. But it would have been in Mr. Howard’s interest to tone it down just a little until he moved to a more tolerant place (like Portland).
posted by leo on
Let me be very clear, the responsibility for Kings death lies with Brandon McInerney and secondarily with the hostile and violent culture present in the school.
But there are ways of navigating hostile territory that allow you to survive and fight another day and gay kids need to be armed with that understanding.
posted by Rob on
But there are ways of navigating hostile territory that allow you to survive and fight another day and gay kids need to be armed with that understanding.
I’d say they also need to be armed literally as well. They have to be prepared to defend their rights.
posted by Brian Miller on
This entire debate strikes me as yet more “blame the victim” rhetoric — from the right, this time, instead of the left (as is often the case).
The issue is not whether someone who is gay or transgender should “hide” in school, but rather, why a teenaged child felt confident in his ability to murder another student in cold blood, in the school itself.
posted by Maxxwell on
Did any here get beat up as a kid for being G/L/B/T ? I did – to a pulp. And I have the emotional scares to prove it. Unfortunetely, Lawrence isn’t here cause he got his head blown off! Now in most parts of the world that’s considered murder. And it’s against the law. Regardless if the child was crazy or planning to do it. And to tell me that if Lawrence King had only kept to himself, this would have never happened? Worng. I was outed at age fifteen. And I had only told one person in my small town. I spent seven years of torment, that was never because I swished or carried a purse.
People are going to hate, and laws are becoming stronger to right the injustice of it.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Stephen, I can appreciate the sentiment that argues young King was ill-served by those adults who thought being “out” and acting out in public is synonymous with practicing good mental health for gay youths, but part of the truth is that King was, indeed, ill-served and with tragic consequence. The entire “out and proud, in your face” theme of adult gay activists can have untoward consequences -when relied upon by vulnerable youth as a strategy for public conduct- and promoted by professionals like those commenting in the Open Ltr at the Advocate. Shame on them for their irresponsibility and wanton disregard for gay youths.
While we can ask if the school, the gay activists groups and the staff at Casa Pacficia contributed to young King’s vulnerability and exposure, we shouldn’t lose sight of the real victims: King and McInerney. Society failed both.
It reminds me of the infamous Sally Jessie case that finally brought her horrible career to a bust when she allowed a gay adult to ambush a str8 neighbor on natl TV in the 1990s. That story, too, played out with tragic consequences.
King and McInerney were in JUNIOR high. These kids were likely the oldest guys in school. Why weren’t their jr high school peers taught to intervene and report the sexual harassment of McInerney by King to school authorities when he made an issue out of baiting McInerney by asking him to be his valentine? One of the conditions for supension, according to the school’s handbook, is sexual harassment.
One of the reasons why public school districts have, at best, minimal dress codes and conduct requirements in school handbooks is to prevent outlandish and disruptive behavior from distracting students from learning. High heel boots, eye shadow and other “flashy attire” aren’t appropriate for anything other than watching Sally Jessie show repeats. My gosh, for a school that requires shirts to be tucked in, it seems incredible that they would allow male students to attend dressed as King has been portrayed in contemporary press.
Society failed both victims, King and McInerney, in this case. And if California’s legal system is allowed to run its likely course, the failure will be compounded by the Hate Crime and Adult Trial preferences sought by the prosecution. And of course, McInerney will continue to be also victimized by the GayLeft PR machine intent on making King another Matthew Shepard symbol.
I took a look at the wiki cite for this matter and, predictably, the GayLeft is already trying to capitialize upon the political mileage for advancing their agenda. Who gives a rip what Hillary or Barry Obama have to say on this matter?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_%22Larry%22_King
It’s a real shame, all around. Thanks, Stephen, for having the courage to even raise the issue of the GayLeft’s (my term) possible collusion in the victimization of young King and McInerney
posted by Craig2 on
Presumably, this school should have had a firearms surveillance and deterence policy, given that it was looking after kids at risk. Why did it break down in this specific context, leading to the death of an innocent teenage boy? Surely the responsible personnel at this institution are guilty of professional neglect of duty, and should be sacked immediately?
Craig2
Wellington, NZ
posted by Michigan-Matt on
I’d prefer that we also check into the role(s) played by Casa Pacifica guardians for young King in encouraging him to sexually harass a fellow student. McInerney, although unsympathetic, is also a victim… and will continue to be, I wager.
posted by Jorge on
First of all you have in the blog post above that transgendereds tend to get their protections last. There is only a limited right for people to dress in a way that comforms with their gender identity because gender identity is not always covered in anti-discrimination laws. This is true in schools and places of employment. So transgendered people have more rights in foster care–good to know (and very important), but is it true in school? On the street? That is important.
You can’t treat young people like adults, telling them all their rights and not telling them the bad side. Adults already know they’re supposed to be suspicious but don’t know their rights. Whenever a teenager is trying to make a big decision, I think social service professionals have a responsibility to tell them everything that could go wrong and ask them what they’re going to do about it. It’s called being real, and it helps them make their decisions more intelligently.
posted by Pat on
Why weren’t their jr high school peers taught to intervene and report the sexual harassment of McInerney by King to school authorities when he made an issue out of baiting McInerney by asking him to be his valentine? One of the conditions for supension, according to the school’s handbook, is sexual harassment.
Is there more to this part of the story? Asking someone to be a valentine doesn’t constitute sexual harassment.
posted by ColoradoPatriot on
MM: “…baiting McInerney by asking him to be his valentine?”
Using your idiotic position, I was sexually harassed hundreds of times while I was in grade school alone!
MM: “McInerney, although unsympathetic, is also a victim…”
You are so utterly filled with contempt that you reach out to a murderer before you would a fellow queer. Disgusting, but not surprising.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
CP, that’s a pretty big chip you’re carrying on your shoulder… for a long, long time.
No, I’m not identifying with McInerney… and as for your condemnation of me, it rings of a typical double-standard you seem to enjoy invoking. You rail against someone (me) who, in your little mind, you think is not identifying with the politically correct “right” party in this matter… and, in doing so, you are guilty of slamming a “fellow queer” -the exact thing you falsely accuse me of doing. Thats’ your face in the mirror, CP.
I know you have issues with anyone who veers from your sense of entitled judgment’ this isn’t the first time you’ve taken comments out of context for a little thread lynching.
I don’t have any “utter contempt” for King or McInernery. I do have contempt for the school district staff and teachers (and others) who allowed this horrible matter to get so far afield that a badgered, harassed and publicly humilated young boy thought his only recourse was violence and taking a life.
When you get off that unbalanced pedestal you climb up on so often, try understanding the simple truth that both boys were victims here. Both are part of this tragedy.
If you want to pick sides, so be it. Find a tree and string up a rope Mr Outrage; but I’ll approach the matter with some compassion and accountability and justice. I’d think, given your lofty self-poised spot on the moral high ground, you’d find compassion, justice and accountability important too.
But like EllenD and others on the GayLeft, you’d just prefer to use the tragey as an opportunity to advance your own agenda… in this instance, your agenda of continued pettiness against a “fellow” queer commenter.
Double standard. It blinds ’em everytime.
posted by Jorge on
I do not think it is normal for “a badgered, harassed and publicly humilated young boy” to come to think “his only recourse was violence and taking a life”. The school is not responsible for his sickness.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Jorge, take a moment and read the LATimes’ serial piece on this tragedy. Several students who were friends of either King’s or McInerney’s spoke about student led efforts to inform teachers and staff about the situation as it was developing. Part of the prosecution’s case for the premediation aspect is that he told students he was going to kill King for the rumors King & fellow students were spreading about McInerney.
If there’s a civil suit, I think the school will be found to be grossly negligent.
And, yes, it isn’t normal for someone to turn to murder as a solution but I’m not sure McInerney was “sick” if you mean mentally. He coldly calculated his opportunity and acted.
Part of the tragedy I was referencing, and there are many including the use of this case as symbol of “hateful oppression” in society by the GayLeft, is that the school didn’t do more to teach the students about anger, intervention, the students as a community of safety and diversity, etc.
In my sons’ schools, the teachers and staff are trained to observe, monitor and intervene effectively. It sounds, from the students own statements, that the school authorities “didn’t want to get involved” in the dispute and harassment.
posted by Pat on
MichiganMatt, do you have a link that King sexually harassed McInerney? After checking through several articles, the only thing I came up with is that Ellen DeGeneris said that King asked McInerney to be his valentine (not sure where she got that info), and that another student claimed that the day before the shooting, King told McInerney that he liked him. It doesn’t appear that either of these constitute sexual harassment. And as far as I know, even if McInerney did consider that he was harassed by these actions, he didn’t report this to any of the school authorities.
The other thing I read was that King would retaliate against those who bullied him by flirting with them. It was unclear if McInerney was one of the bullies. I imagine it would be hard to complain about being sexually harassed after bullying someone.
In any case, if the school knew that King was being bullied, and that King actually did sexually harass students (which he initiated as opposed to a mechanism of defense) and the school knew about it, then I would agree that the school bears some responsibility for King’s death.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
And just to put a finer point on it, in my sons’ schools, there was a break-in and vandalism last year (turning over desks, smashing out windows, flooding the hallways, spray painting the lockers and walls and ceilings, etc) and the school district had 11 counselors available on the 1st day back to help the students handle their “grief and loss of sense of security”. For a break in! Way over board.
posted by Richard on
I suspect that one’s political prejudices are coming into play (i.e. conservatives want to only blame government, liberals want to only blame society).
The reality is more complex, which is why many liberals and conservatives are out of touch with reality.
Clearly, the school dropped the ball on this somewhat. Boys are often emotional mindfields, and some one should have stepped in to mediate something when it was clear that their was a problem.
I am sure that the transgender boy knew all too well that people can be cruel, often because we allow them, and it is easier said them done to tell some one to “change”.
A young boy gender identity is likely the result of complex sociological, cultural and biological factors that cannot be easy turned on and off.
Part of the problem, it would seem, is that their seemed to be little or no communication between the adults in the boy’s life.
His social workers and off-campus adults were telling him great things, if we lived in a perfect world, while his teachers seemed to looking the other way.
posted by Amicus on
The entire “out and proud, in your face” theme of adult gay activists can have untoward consequences -when relied upon by vulnerable youth as a strategy for public conduct- and promoted by professionals like those commenting in the Open Ltr at the Advocate. Shame on them for their irresponsibility and wanton disregard for gay youths.
I disagree with this, MM.
It depends on what one means by “out-and-proud”. Does it include the ability to dress as one likes (within school rules), to talk openly, to bring a boyfriend/girlfriend to the prom, etc., then yes. Does it involve flirting with straight guys (retaliatory or otherwise) and/or some things that Lawrence probably ought to have been told as Casa Pacifica, like don’t fall ‘in love’ with a straight guy; and, if cupid plays fancy, don’t deal with it by telling him in a publically or challenging way …
So, if one had to go around the table:
1. The hostile environment at the school should have been stopped by adults. This would have curtailed the need for either to act out in “self defense”.
2. If the situation was too grave to be fixed/addressed, the one of the kids should have been removed, if possible (that’s why Hetrick-Martin is still a good idea).
3. The idea that the “activists pamphlet” was off-base or proximate seems unproven. Whether taunting-back (not part of the pamphlet) was a way to “be proud” or “stand firm” is debatable (although it seemed to be in his personality, something that a conflict resolution specialist ought to have recognized easily).
Even if it was ill-advised, the disproportionate response (two bullets in the head in a computer room) is most likely indicative of a kind of homophobia that is in a small number of people or that external parties did not move swiftly enough to adjudicate a conflict, for one reason or another (there are stories of Harvard roommates who have killed each other, even, because everyone else decided that they didn’t want to ‘get involved’).
posted by ModerateGay on
People are making this way too complicated. It’s not rocket science.
1) King is a victim, period. Of McInerney. (Not so much of “society”, “homophobia”, blah blah blah.)
2) McInerney is probably a victim. Of bad parenting. (The articles don’t say it, but it’s actually hard to raise a killer. Something had to be wrong in McInerney’s home, probably several things.)
3) If gay-supportive grownups taught King to be out about his transgenderism, **and if they did not also** teach him self-defense skills as well, then yes, they failed King. The job of grownups is to equip kids with information and skills that helps them survive and flourish.
Going back to the first comment, “Since when do I have to carry a weapon to defend myself for exercising my rights?” – Since about, oh, 1776.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Moderate Gay, it easy for you because you probably condone the use of King as a symbol by the GayLeft of majority oppression… and, if you did read the more detailed series of articles in the LATimes, you’d also know that the GayLeft was/cntinues using King as a symbol in the fight for gun control. Note how the younger McInerney is often identified as a “member of the Young Marines” and how he got the weapon out of a cache at his father’s home… and the other GayLeft gun control clucking.
Sorry, it aint as easy as you’d like to reduce it. It’s far more nuanced and important to all of us that we understand that detail, rather than dismissing it because it doesn’t fit headline-mentality.
The students at Green JrHS are victims -especially the ones who saw the murder or knew the participants… or worse, egged on McInerney with those taunts of King’s that King thought McInerney was “cute”, “hot”, etc. Talk about lighting a fuse.
And King and McInerney are the larger victims -and McInerney’s course of victimization is just starting.
I think the orginal article was about how we ought to be raising questions about whether or not adults ill-served King or not. And, in raising those questions, the GayLeft was quick to pounce with more of the usual PR spin and advocacy advancement and out-is-proud-damn-the-torpedo nonsense.
But you go ahead and reduce to three bullet points if it helps you deal with the situation. Our entire culture has devolved to headline reading and 15 second stories of “deep” superficiality.
posted by ModerateGay on
Goodness, what a set of accusations. Do you do that to everyone who agrees with you? Or did you not read my comment?
posted by MIchigan-Matt on
ModerateGay, nope I don’t and yes I did read your comment… to answer your questions. I think you were the one who began by trying to discount any analysis of the King-McInerney case with your “this ain’t rocket science, people” comment. People who generally dismiss other opinions with three bullet point summaries missed far more than “rocket science” in school… if they ever made it that far.
Frankly, it isn’t an issue that can be reduced to an overly simplistic headline-reading mentality. Sorry if that offends you… try gaining some depth in analysis by actually reading others’ comments.
posted by AKN on
@Michigan-Matt:
I wanted to bring up this excerpt from the LA Times series:
“[King’s friend] and others recall that the name-calling began long before he told his small circle of confidants that he was gay, before problems at home made him a ward of the court, and before he summoned the courage to further assert his sexual orientation by wearing makeup and girl’s boots with his school uniform.
His friends say the verbal cruelty persisted for months, and grew worse after the slightly built Larry pushed back by “flirting” with some of his mockers. One of them was Brandon, who seethed over it, the friends say.”
This confirms Pat’s suspicion that McInerney was bullying King before King ever “flirted back”, so I also have a hard time agreeing with your characterization of that flirting as “sexual harassment.”
You also described McInerney somewhat sympathetically as “a badgered, harassed and publicly humilated young boy.” Wait, what?! The article suggests that McInerney was only being teased about this for a matter of days, and that he was being teased by his own ‘cool kid’ friends. And his response is to shoot someone in the head? Obviously, King — who had a years-long history of being ‘badgered, harassed and publicly humiliated’ — had a far more well-adjusted response to that harassment than McInerney. Say what you will about adults recklessly encouraging him to be provocative. Asking someone to be your valentine should never provoke gunfire.
I’m addressing this comment to you because your comments make it seem as though you’re more concerned that school authorities did nothing to stop King’s “harassment” of McInerney than you are concerned about the longer history of kids harassing King, and the school’s equal negligence of that.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
AKN, it’s like I wrote earlier… there are two victims here: King and McInerney. More if you count the kids who witnessed the horror of King’s killing.
I am not “more” concerned about either King or McInerney’s bullied/harassed treatment.
I am greatly concerned that the school authorities and teaching staff -as well as King’s enablers at CasaPacifica- will get off scot-free for their negligence in this tragedy.
Of course, that’s one of the points of Stephen’s comments here… maybe others are at fault in this case and we (gays) need to resist using King as another MatthewShepard symbol… we first need to look at the messages we’re teaching our gay youth and begin by making certain they are safe in their conduct in public.
Out and Proud and In Your Face is great for the adults in ActUP… it ain’t a good strategy for kids in middle school.
posted by dan on
first let me say I don’t condone what happened, it is in excusable at every level and horrific.
Now I will state what no one will say in our “politically correct society”.
Why do gays insist on being “in your face” with their lifestyle? This child, in middle school wasn’t just gay, he chose to push the envelope in a big way, i.e. wearing heels, makeup, jewelry, painted nails etc. Clearly being in with a bunch of boys in a rural community where identity issues are emerging is making an intentional statement designed to provoke a reaction. Unfortunately the reaction was what it was, but the victim clearly was looking for a reaction.
In addition, my children have dress codes at school and will be sent home for violation. My son is not allowed to wear a baseball cap during school hours… yes a baseball cap, one would argue this is a symbol of his “boyness” and my daughter can’t wear spaghetti strap tops or show a bare midriff. As we are in California, I’m sure the school there had similar dress codes, however no one sent that child home, probably “in fear” of the gay backlash that everyone is afraid to say anything to.
Why is it that the gay community “insist” we accept their “lifestyle” and are in your face with it constantly. “Gay Pride” parades etc, I mean we don’t have “Heterosexual Parades” simulating every type of sexual conduct and behaviour on the tv screens for everyone to see.
In concluding, once again I think what happened is horrific and in no way is justifiable, however common sense is not to wave a red flag to a bull. I’m not going to stand up in front of a bunch of hell’s angels and state “bikers are pussies”. If I do I can’t say, after I’ve been beaten to a pulp, why did this tragedy happen? Those terrible bikers for not accepting “my freedom of speech”. No, if you want to push the envelope and elecit a reaction, you most certainly will get a reaction, and sadly, every now and then, you miscalculate and the odds aren’t in your favor and this happens. Instead of being shocked by the shooters reaction, people should be amazed at peoples “tolerance” that it hasn’t happened more often. All things considered, people have been pretty tolerant to ignore the obvious, and yes aggressive, in your face confrontations.
posted by Charles Wilson on
If Stephen Miller and the other Log Cabinettes here had gotten their way over the past 50 years, there’d be no discernible gay rights progress at all. They’d be telling people to be glad they were allowed to sneak into a queer bar once a month, and would advise the men to wear suits and ties and the women dresses and high heels.
You people forget just who it was that started the gay rights movement. The Log Cabinette fear of seeming unruly or abnormal has been a failure. Just look at the Republican Party; since LCR’s founding in 1977, Republican policies have grown steadily more hateful.
The fact that people will take self-protective strategies in certain situations does not make oppression right. The justifications for that kid’s murder here are, well, just what you’d expect for the “Independent” (read: self-hating right-wing) Gay Forum.