Political Crossfire Forums

[Anarchy_For_All]

Remember the last Civil Rights movement? The Black Panthers? Well, now there is a new movement for equal rights, and we have no one like Huey P. Newton or Malcom X on the side of the LGBT. So, this is what I propose: A group made up of armed homosexuals to defend themselves against bigots who would like to whipe them out! I would call it, "The Pink Panther Party". (No relation to idiotic TV show) Who's the pansy now, Phelps, Coulter, Robertson ETC? WHO'S THE PANSY NOW????!!!!!!

[Valdimar]

Utterly ridiculous, unless of course you are being purely sarcastic.

[Melchior]

We already have groups like that, don't we? Log Cabin Republicans is a faction within the GOP: http://online.logcabin.org/

Libertarians for gay rights: http://www.outrightusa.org/

Are you saying there should be a lobby like the NRA for the gay rights movement?

[John Galt]

I remember reading about a pro-gun rights pro-multi-person marriages (like 5 chicks and 3 guys) group. I wouldn't want to mess with them because if you mess with one, you have to mess with 7 of them and they're armed.

But other than that, yes, this is pretty useless. Why? Because it's advocating violence as a means to what? Ending the supposed violence? THere have been a few isolated and unfourtunate incidents.... but who was the last gay guy that got lynched for being gay? Matt Shepard? Yeah what was that 8 years ago? And didn't they get the death penalty for that s**t? Yeah ---- there is really no need for this at all.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

I don't think violence would be beneficial for the cause.

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: But other than that, yes, this is pretty useless. Why? Because it's advocating violence as a means to what? Ending the supposed violence? THere have been a few isolated and unfourtunate incidents.... but who was the last gay guy that got lynched for being gay? Matt Shepard? Yeah what was that 8 years ago? And didn't they get the death penalty for that s**t? Yeah ---- there is really no need for this at all.
There are other cases pending where the motive for murder was the victim's sexual orientation. Not every incident of anti-gay violence ends up gaining national attention or for that matter even being reported.

There used to be a citizen's group that patrolled some predominately gay neighborhoods as a means of protecting them. Can't remember what they were called, but they represented a somewhat militant response to anti-gay violence. I'm not surprised to see the rhetoric now advocating an even more militant response to the cranked-up anti-gay rhetoric that is gaining popularity and social acceptance thanks to the renewed dominance of the right in government.

[John Galt]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: But other than that, yes, this is pretty useless. Why? Because it's advocating violence as a means to what? Ending the supposed violence? THere have been a few isolated and unfourtunate incidents.... but who was the last gay guy that got lynched for being gay? Matt Shepard? Yeah what was that 8 years ago? And didn't they get the death penalty for that s**t? Yeah ---- there is really no need for this at all.
There are other cases pending where the motive for murder was the victim's sexual orientation. Not every incident of anti-gay violence ends up gaining national attention or for that matter even being reported.

There used to be a citizen's group that patrolled some predominately gay neighborhoods as a means of protecting them. Can't remember what they were called, but they represented a somewhat militant response to anti-gay violence. I'm not surprised to see the rhetoric now advocating an even more militant response to the cranked-up anti-gay rhetoric that is gaining popularity and social acceptance thanks to the renewed dominance of the right in government.

:blah:

Where is the violence against homosexuals? I'msureit gets reported somewhere, considering the liberal's love of creating "hate-crime"(as opposed to regular, love crime) legislation. It's always plastered all over themedia and then some schmuck decides that if there was n addition two year mandatory sentance on hate crimes over and above the death penalty, it would really make people think twice and we need hate crime legislation. And... more than that, if people arethinking the wrong bigoted things when commititng crimes,well, then they're justplain evil, whereas regular criminals, whenthey hack uptheir victims and eat them, well, they don't deserve asmuch prision time because unlike those bigots -- they can be rehabilitated, if only we had more funding....


Seriously they report this crap all the time. Of course, the media has yet to start just plain making up this stuff (although they do with other things a la Rather) but I can see it happening...

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: Where is the violence against homosexuals? I'msureit gets reported somewhere, considering the liberal's love of creating "hate-crime"(as opposed to regular, love crime) legislation.
Here we go with the anti-liberal stuff again. Give it a rest already. This isn't about liberals vs. conservatives.

I'm actually not supportive of hate crime legislation myself - it appears to be a bad solution to a worse problem. That doesn't mean I believe there isn't a problem with violence being perpetrated against people on the sole basis of their being perceived as homosexual, or that the stats being compiled under these questionable laws aren't at least somewhat useful. We're limited of course by the fact that not all states classify crimes targeting gay men & lesbians on the basis of their sexual orientation as hate crimes (only about 29 do - see further below).

Here are the FBI's stats for hate crimes targeting people on the basis of sexual orientation for the last five years for which the data has been made available at this time:

16% in 1999
15.7% in 2000
13.9% in 2001
16.6% in 2002
16.4% in 2003 - tied with those targeting religion.

FBI Crime Statistics (you'll have to drill down to the individual reports for each year to find the stats I've quoted above and they're buried in the summarizing text of each very long report - so don't give me any crap about those stats not being at the link given).

Keep in mind - this was all before the issue of gay marriage really started to heat up. I expect we'll see an increase when the 2004 and 2005 stats come out - more visibility means more pissed off people targeting us.

Given the claims by some that homosexuals only comprise about 2% of the population, the rates of violence against them appear rather lopsided. Only 29 states report violence targeting gay men & lesbians as hate crimes. (that was as of October 2004 - doubtful that very many - if any - have added it since then). Bear in mind that these stats only represent reported incidents.

In light of these facts, we are fairly safe to assume the stats quoted are on the low side.

So you can keep your BS about 'where's the violence against gay people?'. It isn't rare - it's an every day occurance with many incidents being minor and going unreported. Just because an incident doesn't result in grave physical injury or get recorded by the FBI as a hate crime doesn't mean that we should discount its impact - that of creating an environment that is in many places openly hostile toward gay men & lesbians.

[John Galt]

I take issue withall of it. I doubt many of them are actually motivated by homosexuality.

If I mugged you, would it be a hate crime? I think it would be, even though I just wanted your money. I am sure this has happened with race before, and it is patently absurd. More than that, of course, is that I think is is immoral to have hate crime legislation, as well as unconstitutional (from a national standpoint of course) as we are free to think whatever we well please. Our actions are what matter, not the thoughts behind them. In any event, it would be impossible for you to prove to me that all those crimes, or even a majority of them, would not have occured had the victim not been X, as I believe it is far from the truth. I am appalled that our tax dollars are being used in this matter, keeping these numbers, which, I remind all, is unconstitutional, as we do have freedom of speech.

I'm talking about something that was proven, like the Matthew Sheppard case, to be motivated by anti-gay bigotry. It isn't there. I don't trustthese numbers... I want actual media reports, which, I am sure, if these crimes were truely motivated by "hate" -- exist.

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: I take issue withall of it. I doubt many of them are actually motivated by homosexuality.

If I mugged you, would it be a hate crime? I think it would be, even though I just wanted your money. I am sure this has happened with race before, and it is patently absurd. More than that, of course, is that I think is is immoral to have hate crime legislation, as well as unconstitutional (from a national standpoint of course) as we are free to think whatever we well please. Our actions are what matter, not the thoughts behind them. In any event, it would be impossible for you to prove to me that all those crimes, or even a majority of them, would not have occured had the victim not been X, as I believe it is far from the truth. I am appalled that our tax dollars are being used in this matter, keeping these numbers, which, I remind all, is unconstitutional, as we do have freedom of speech.

I'm talking about something that was proven, like the Matthew Sheppard case, to be motivated by anti-gay bigotry. It isn't there. I don't trustthese numbers... I want actual media reports, which, I am sure, if these crimes were truely motivated by "hate" -- exist.
Your demand is an unreasonable one for the scope of this debate. I'm not going to go scouring the newspapers nationwide to dig up examples for you.

As someone who has been the victim of anti-gay violence on more than one occasion, I will tell you here and now that you are completely full of s**t with this. I never reported any of the instances, largely because I was fortunate enough to not be seriously injured from any of them and I figured the legal mess wouldn't be worth the hassle. A couple of my acquaintances were not so lucky. One was beaten and left for dead. One was murdered. Another was beaten badly enough that he had to have most of his teeth recapped.

I am pretty well convinced that even if I did find examples for you online, you'd find some other way to wiggle out of acknowledging them.

My opinion of you has reached a brand new low, John.

[John Galt]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: I take issue withall of it. I doubt many of them are actually motivated by homosexuality.

If I mugged you, would it be a hate crime? I think it would be, even though I just wanted your money. I am sure this has happened with race before, and it is patently absurd. More than that, of course, is that I think is is immoral to have hate crime legislation, as well as unconstitutional (from a national standpoint of course) as we are free to think whatever we well please. Our actions are what matter, not the thoughts behind them. In any event, it would be impossible for you to prove to me that all those crimes, or even a majority of them, would not have occured had the victim not been X, as I believe it is far from the truth. I am appalled that our tax dollars are being used in this matter, keeping these numbers, which, I remind all, is unconstitutional, as we do have freedom of speech.

I'm talking about something that was proven, like the Matthew Sheppard case, to be motivated by anti-gay bigotry. It isn't there. I don't trustthese numbers... I want actual media reports, which, I am sure, if these crimes were truely motivated by "hate" -- exist.
Your demand is an unreasonable one for the scope of this debate. I'm not going to go scouring the newspapers nationwide to dig up examples for you.

As someone who has been the victim of anti-gay violence on more than one occasion, I will tell you here and now that you are completely full of s**t with this. I never reported any of the instances, largely because I was fortunate enough to not be seriously injured from any of them and I figured the legal mess wouldn't be worth the hassle. A couple of my acquaintances were not so lucky. One was beaten and left for dead. One was murdered. Another was beaten badly enough that he had to have most of his teeth recapped.

I am pretty well convinced that even if I did find examples for you online, you'd find some other way to wiggle out of acknowledging them.

My opinion of you has reached a brand new low, John.

Spare me. Sure, it exists, I will aknowledge that, and I never said it didn't. But so does school violence. Neither is a very large problem that I care about or anyone should seriously care about as it is such a small problem and we've got much largerproblems on our hands. We don'tneed bands of parents patrolling the school halls looking for crazies and we don't need Pink Panthers patrolling San Fransico and P-Town and Palm Beach looking for heterosexual bigots. It isn't necessary and unwelcoming.

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: It isn't necessary and unwelcoming.
Like being harassed for being gay is 'welcoming'? Sure, maybe it's not a big enough problem for you to care about, but I have to face it every day. Believe me - for me it's a huge issue. Be glad it isn't one for you - you don't appreciate how lucky you are on that score.

[SavannahMan]

I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of violent crimes committed against homosexuals were committed BY homosexuals.

Throwing out statistics on the percentage of the hate crimes committed against homosexuals tells us nothing. Tell us simply do violent crimes happen against homosexuals more often on average that that of heterosexuals. If there IS even a difference I would guess that the difference is explained by the high incidence of domestic violence in homosexual relationships which is well documented already.

[Melchior]

SavannahMan wrote: I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of violent crimes committed against homosexuals were committed BY homosexuals.

What is your problem? Seriously you are doing everything in your power to paint homosexuals are mentally disturbed, violent, weak individuals. Give it a rest you bigot.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

SavannahMan wrote: I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of violent crimes committed against homosexuals were committed BY homosexuals.

Throwing out statistics on the percentage of the hate crimes committed against homosexuals tells us nothing. Tell us simply do violent crimes happen against homosexuals more often on average that that of heterosexuals. If there IS even a difference I would guess that the difference is explained by the high incidence of domestic violence in homosexual relationships which is well documented already.

Yeah ok, like all heterosexual couples are in loving relationships where there is no violence and abuse!!?? :roll:

[Melchior]

I bet his statistics are from some biased "family values" theocratic website.

Go ahead, post it, I'm dieing to see bogus statistics concerning the demonization and generalization of an entire demographic.

[SavannahMan]

The American Journal of Public Health has published a detailed study of battering victimization in the male homosexual community (December 2002, Vol. 92, No. 12). The probability-based sampling of "men who have sex with men" (MSM) focused on four geographical areas (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York) and resulted in 2,881 completed telephone interviews.

Based on these responses, this first-of-its-kind study determined that the rate of battering victimization among gay men in the target group (men over 18 who had engaged in homosexual activity since age 14, or who identified as gay, homosexual, or bisexual) is "substantially higher than among heterosexual men" and also possibly higher than the rate for heterosexual women, according to the study.

The researchers report a high rate of battering within the context of intimate homosexual partnerships, with 39% of those studied reporting at least one type of battering by a partner over the last five years.

In contrast, only about 7.7% of heterosexual men of all ages report physical or sexual partner abuse during their entire lifetimes. (Lifetime rates of abuse are generally higher than those within a five-year period.)

So I suppose the AJPH are a bunch of bigots too since they dare to report statistics you don't personally like

[SavannahMan]

"Homosexual activists David Island and Patrick Letellier - both of San Francisco and co-editors of the National Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence Network Newsletter - write in their book, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them, that domestic violence is a primary health problem for individuals involved in homosexual behavior ranking behind only AIDS for males, cancer for females, and drug use for both.

"Island and Letellier write: 'The probability of violence occurring in a gay couple is mathematically double the probability of that in a heterosexual couple ... we believe as many as 650,000 gay men may be victims of domestic violence each year in the United States (page 14).

650,000. There are - according to the FBI - about 1300-1500 hate-crimes committed against people per year because of their homosexual persuasion - do the math 650,000 vs 1500.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Quote: Domestic Violence Prevalent in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Relationships

Report Reveals 41% Increase in Cases, Unequal Legal Protection for Victims

Between 25% and 33% of relationships between lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender partners include abuse, a rate equal to that of heterosexual relationships, according to a report released today. Compiled by the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP), the report documents 3, 327 cases of such domestic violence in 1997.

Other report highlights include the finding that statutes in seven states exclude same-sex victims of domestic violence from qualifying for a domestic violence protective order. In three additional states, these orders are arguably unavailable. Statutes in only four states make these orders explicitly available to same-sex victims.

"Domestic violence protective orders are perhaps the most significant legal remedy available to victims," said Toni Broaddus, co-author of the report, "but unfortunately, some states make heterosexuality a prerequisite."

NCAVP documented 975 more cases of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender domestic violence than in 1996, an increase of 41%. According to Greg Merrill, co-author of the report, "While this is an excellent sign that awareness and willingness to seek help have improved, the overall lack of sensitive, available services spells tragedy."

According to Susan Holt, Coordinator of Domestic Violence Programs at the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center: "While people may discriminate, domestic violence does not. It happens in all types of families, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender ones."

http://www.lambda.org/dv97.htm

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Quote: Differences between same-sex and opposite-sex domestic violence

Although domestic violence is largely the same in heterosexual and homosexual relationships, gay, lesbian and bisexual victims of domestic violence have some additional problems.

Fewer services

To get help you have to come out. There aren't very many services to help lesbians, and women who have been abused by another woman are sometimes treated with ignorance or homophobia by the domestic violence service agencies and shelters that are supposed to help them. There are few or no shelters and services for male victims of domestic violence, gay or straight.

There are some domestic violence services specifically for GLBT people such as:

* The Northwest Network for GLBT survivors of domestic violence
* Gay Men's Domestic Violence Project

Increased isolation

The isolation that accompanies domestic violence can be compounded by being GLBT in a homophobic society. Silence about domestic violence within the LGBT community further isolates the victim, giving more power to the batterer.

Protecting the community

GLBT people feel understandably protective of their relationships in the face of widespread discrimination and negative stereotypes among the wider population. Many GLBT people don't want to admit openly that their relationship-which is already seen as "sick" - has this problem.

Heterosexist control

One of the weapons that batterers in same-sex relationships may use involve "heterosexist control." This means that the batterer takes advantage of the homophobic and heterosexist nature of the larger society - as well as our own internalized heterosexism - to further dominate and control their partner. Heterosexist control can take a variety of forms, including:

* Threats to "out" the victim -- A batterer may threaten to tell friends, family, co-workers, bosses or the landlord about the victim's sexual orientation as an additional threat.
* Increased risk of losing children -- The risk of losing children to third parties (the birth mother or father, grandparents, the State) is greater for GLBT couples when domestic violence is involved. A batterer can threaten disclosing the sexual orientation of a parent to the courts or foster care authorities.
* Threats of deportation -- For individuals who may not be document residents of this country, abusive partners may threaten to report their partner to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

http://www.metrokc.gov/health/glbt/dv.htm