Blaming the Victims (Yet Again)

This sickens me so much I’m at a loss for words:

Fifteen year-old Larry King (no relation to the CNN interviewer) was shot twice in the back of the head by his classmate Brandon McInerney while sitting in school in Oxnard, California. Now that McInerney is on trial, the boy’s legal team and the school administration are using the tried and true “he was asking for it” defense. This is totally disgusting.
According to a story in the L.A. Times today, “McInerney’s defense attorneys… acknowledge that the boy pulled the trigger but say that he was pushed to the breaking point by King’s taunts.” Yes, it’s the tried and true “gay panic defense” that preys on juries’ homophobia to get confessed killers cleared for murdering gay people. It was even used against Matthew Shepard, when one of his killers said he was driven to kill the gay college student because he hit on him.

It only gets worse from there.

I know that defense attorneys have very few avenues they can take with an obviously guilty client. But this tactic is beyond reprehensible. What they’re basically trying to argue is that, should you suffer an unwanted advance, it is perfectly right and fine to shoot a person in the head. You should be able to murder a human being and walk free just because you were briefly inconvenienced and made to feel a bit icky.

I don’t imagine they’d be arguing that women have that blanket right to murder men who come on to them. But, y’know, gays. Ew. Of course it’s all right for a straight guy to shoot a transsexual or a gay dude, because that’s a threat to manhood. Kinda like when your wife sleeps with some other dude. It’s okay to shoot ’em in the heat of passion – why not be able to shoot queers, too?

One can only hope that the jury is not so morally bereft as to buy this argument. But we need to have a conversation, a very long and unflinching conversation, about the kind of society in which arguments of this sort can even be entertained. We’re supposedly a first-world nation, and yet there are not insubstantial numbers of people who don’t see much wrong with demonizing and victimizing gays, lesbians, and transsexuals. When a little girl gets raped, an entire town rallies round the rapists, because, y’know, she wore makeup and was obviously asking for it. How dare those sorts of people lure nice, upstanding young men into performing savage acts?

Some folks, otherwise decent, may claim that the defense attorneys are only doing their job. Sure, they have to blame the victim – how else can they defend their client? I don’t know the answer to that. I know this, though: that sort of tactic is devastating to victims, survivors, and the culture at large. There’s probably nothing we can do to prevent defense attorneys from using such tactics, but that doesn’t mean we have to accept them. We can speak out against them. We can tell our society that murdering a person because they made the mistake of flirting with a homophobic sociopath, that raping a girl because she wore makeup in the presence of men, is not justifiable. There are certain things you just do not do in a civilized society. There are some actions that cannot be excused on the grounds that the victim wasn’t a perfect, straight, chaste person.

This dehumanizing bullshit may be a tactic defense attorneys feel comfortable using, but society at large never should. Victims have shouldered too much of the blame. Time to pass that blame to those who have earned it: the victimizers.

Equality is Beautiful

New York State is celebrating marriage equality, and it’s beautiful.

Niagara Falls by @LanceBass

Governor Cuomo wholeheartedly declared July 24 as a day to commemorate marriage equality, which gives us even more to celebrate aside from the marriages of a lot of very happy couples.  If you really want your heart warmed, click here to see Phyllis Siegal and Connie Kopelov right after they tied the knot.  The Salt Lake Tribune has a huge gallery.  And the Digital Cuttlefish has written a poem especially for the occasion: “My Marriage is Gay Today.”  At least one hetero marriage has been changed by all this gay marrying!

By the time I, like Phyllis and Connie, am a white-haired old lady, I hope that every state has allowed same-sex couples to suffer matrimony like the rest of us get married, and that the idea that the United States once was a place where people who loved each other couldn’t marry simply because of similar genitalia is as unbelievable to the youngsters as the idea of Jim Crow and bans on interracial marriages.

I think this calls for a song.

(And yes, I’ll have Los Links up later today. I’m horribly behind, but they’re coming.)

The Limits of Tolerance

Johann Hari asks a very good question: “Can we talk about Muslim homophobia now? (h/t)”

Here’s a few portents from the East End that we have chosen to ignore. In May 2008, a 15 year old Muslim girl tells her teacher she thinks she might be gay, and the Muslim teacher in a state-funded comprehensive tells her “there are no gays round here” and she will “burn in hell” if she ever acts on it. (I know because she emailed me, suicidal and begging for help). In September 2008, a young gay man called Oliver Hemsley, is walking home from the gay pub the George and Dragon when a gang of young Muslims stabs him eight times, in the back, in the lungs, and in his spinal column. In January 2010, when the thug who did it is convicted, a gang of thirty Muslims storms the George and Dragon in revenge and violently attacks everybody there. All through, it was normal to see young men handing out leaflets outside the Whitechapel Ideas Store saying gays are “evil.” Most people accept them politely. 
These are not isolated incidents.

Johann brings up the point that because Muslims are so frequently targets of bigotry, harassment and violence themselves, there’s an understandable reluctance to speak out against their less-admirable acts.  It’s easy to get yourself branded Islamophobic for pointing out that Islam isn’t necessarily a religion of peace, and that strict adherence to Islam leads to despicable acts.  But, as Johann says,

It’s patronizing – and authentically racist – to treat Muslims as if they are children, or animals, who can only react to their oppression by jeering at or attacking people who have done them no harm, and who they object to because of a book written in the sixth century. Muslims are human beings who can choose not to this. The vast majority, of course, do not attack anyone. But they should go further. They should choose instead to see us as equal human beings, who live and love just like them, and do not deserve scorn and prejudice.

Giving people a pass to be bigoted, damaging jerks just because they’re a member of a despised minority doesn’t do any sector of society any good.  It normalizes dangerous behavior.  It doesn’t confront the intolerance before it gets wildly out of control.  And it only feeds cycles of oppression.  No one – not even atheists – are saying Muslims have to give up their religion.  But we expect Christians and Jews and members of other faiths to respect gay folks, even if they do think gays are icky.  It’s ridiculous to give homophobia a pass out of some misguided sense of fairness.  It’s not fair.  It’s not fair to Muslim people who are lesbians or gays or bisexuals or transgendered.  It’s not fair to those Muslims who might discover that their religion can accommodate gays just fine.  And it’s not fair to the wider community, LGBT and allies, who are sick to death of seeing people get harassed, hurt and killed because of the way they love.

There are limits to tolerance.  We can tolerate people of other faiths.  We can’t tolerate actual harm they do for the greater glory of God. Let’s do talk about Muslim homophobia, just as we talk about homophobia in all its many disgusting forms.  Let’s not stay silent about issues that are so critically important.

Shame on You, New York Senate

More specifically, shame on the conniving Cons who promised their support and then pulled a Lucy:

New York’s state Assembly had already approved same-sex marriage this year, and Gov. David Paterson (D) was anxious to sign the measure into law. All that was necessary was the state Senate to pass the bill, and rumor it had the necessary number of Republican votes had already been lined up.
Indeed, it was poised to be a historic day in Albany — right up until the chamber voted.

The State Senate defeated a bill on Wednesday that would legalize same-sex marriage, after an emotional debate that touched on civil rights, family and history. The vote means that the bill, pushed by Gov. David A. Paterson, is effectively dead for the year and destroys the optimism of gay rights advocates.

The bill was defeated by a decisive margin of 38 to 24. The Democrats, who have a bare, one-seat majority, did not have enough votes to pass the bill without some Republican support, but not a single Republican senator voted for the measure.

I’d heard as late as this morning that the votes really would be there, and that some GOP moderates would break ranks and support equality. It’s unclear, at this point, whether a) Dems in the chamber are just bad at counting; b) some Republicans went back on their word, or c) a little of both.

Oh, I’m pretty sure the Dems aren’t that bad at counting.  It appears they are that gullible, though. And there’s eight of them that are that bigoted.

New Yorkers took to the streets in protest.  Let’s hope that next year, the Senate starts listening to the majority of New York residents who support same-sex marriage.  I’m very, very tired of seeing people denied their civil rights and their common humanity because of other idiots’ sexual hang-ups.

On a somewhat related note, Sweden’s cutting off funding to Uganda for their anti-gay fuckery.  I wish I could say the United States would join them in doing the right thing, but doing the right thing has been awfully difficult for this country lately.

Heckuvajob, New Jersey

So, between electing a motherfucking Con as governor and letting the Catholic Church tell you same sex marriage is bad while shuffling sexually abusing priests around so they can continue their predations isn’t so bad, you’ve managed stop progress dead in its tracks.  Heckuva job.  You should feel real fucking proud, there.

Same sex marriage advocates are seeing the end of the line for their cause in an unlikely place: New Jersey. Marriage equality was once expected to be all but inevitable in the Garden state, but as Newark Star-Ledger political columnist Tim Moran reports today, all that changed with the election of Gov.-elect Chris Christie (R).
Christie promised on the campaign trail to veto the same-sex marriage law that Moran reports many expected the state legislature to pass this year. Christie’s defeat of Gov. Jon Corzine (D), coupled with a stepped up opposition campaign by the Catholic Church, has led one-time supporters of marriage equality in New Jersey to change their tune.

This is what you get believing Cons can solve your problems.  And guess what?  New Jersey’s economy shall remain in the toilet, and corruption shall still reign.  All you’ve done by electing in the opposition is ensuring you’ve gotten yourselves fucked over even worse.

The stupidity in this country makes me seriously ashamed to be an American.

Texas Anti-Gay Fervor Screws Homophobes

Happily married in Texas?  Are you sure you’re married, happily or un?

Not according to the Texas constitution:

Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state.
The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that “marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.” But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:
“This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”
Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively “eliminates marriage in Texas,” including common-law marriages.

And if you don’t think that amendment pertains to you just because one spouse has twig-and-berries and the other doesn’t, and you’re officially married with a license and everything, you’ve got another think coming.  Just ask any lawyer who knows what “legal status identical or similar to marriage” means.

Looks like the homophobes have fucked over their sacred institution rather badly, dunnit?  Excuse me while I go laugh my ass off.  Damn, I love poetic justice.

Our George Spanks the Bigots

And he does not spare the rod.

First, he provides a Handy Marriage Chart, and then asks, “Oh, and while we’re on about it, how is it ever OK for people to vote about other people’s rights?  Maybe we should vote on everyone’s right to marry.  Or not.”

Absolutely.

Then he delivers a message to the morons who voted to take marriage rights away in Maine.  And when he gets done with the message, he adds the perfect Parthian shot:

Those celebrating their “victory” in Maine, just think; are you so sure of God’s will that you will discriminate against “the least of these”?  By your own lights, you better be damned sure.  Me, I don’t believe in heaven or hell, but I know the world we do live in won’t be improved by prejudice or discrimination.

I know one thing for sure.  The world would be vastly improved if it contained more people like George.

Maine Voters Strip Civil Rights

Shame on you, 53% of Maine:

Let’s start with Maine’s No on 1 campaign. We lost. So sorry, Maine gays. You’re still not quite human.
The problem with gay-marriage referendums is, it’s about civil rights. Civil rights exist because your legal status shouldn’t depend on popular opinion. If we’d had referendums in 1964 about the Civil Rights Act, it would still be illegal for Heidi Klum to marry Seal. Seems silly, right? That’s because it is.

With 87 percent of precincts reporting early Wednesday morning, 53 percent of voters had approved the repeal, ending an expensive and emotional fight that was closely watched around the country as a referendum on the national gay-marriage movement. Polls had suggested a much closer race.
Maine voters also decided to expand the state’s 10-year-old medical marijuana law, approving a ballot question to allow state-regulated dispensaries to grow the drug and sell it to patients. The vote comes weeks after the Obama administration announced it would not prosecute patients and distributors who are in “clear and unambiguous” compliance with state laws. Maine will be the third state, after New Mexico and Rhode Island, to allow tightly regulated, nonprofit marijuana dispensaries.

Yeah, polls suggested a much closer race because people are so reluctant to admit they’re homophobic. But hey, how about those stoners? Closeted Maine Republicans can still get high, so you got that going for you.

I find it difficult to express my outrage, because there aren’t really words for it.  The fact that over 50% of voters can strip civil rights away from fellow human beings is disgusting.  I have no fucking idea why gays getting married is such a problem.  It’s not like anyone’s coming into homophobe’s homes and forcing them into same-sex marriages.  If two consenting adults love each other and want to commit to each other for life, what fucking business do these bigoted fucktards have stripping that right away?  I don’t understand it, don’t respect it, and I hope to fuck the people of this country eventually extract themselves from the dark ages and join the rest of the enlightened world.

I’m going to be petty here.  I’m going to hope that the 53% of voters who can’t extend a simple human right to fellow human beings get to experience the anguish of seeing a precious right stripped away, just once in their lives.  I doubt it will teach them compassion, or empathy, or simple humanity.  But it might.  And I hope they’ll get to experience having their rights restored, realize what justice means, and learn to appreciate justice for others.

I know.  Dream on, right?

At least I can be proud that my own state did the right thing.  At least Washington’s LGBT couples now have a few precious rights.  Let’s see if, eventually, we go the whole distance.  I want to attend a real, live wedding where my friends can be pronounced husband and husband, or wife and wife.

It’s something Maine’s couples will have to wait until more enlightened times for.