UPDATE 2: Your grades are available here; you'll need your student ID to find your grade. I'll keep this thread open for one more week so that those of you who haven't completed your responses can do so.UPDATE: Great job of discussing question 1, everyone. I think we've articulated most of the arguments, at this point, so if you're posting your response now , please respond to question 2.
Please post your response to one of the questions below by Saturday, November 7, at 8 a.m. Then respond to 2 of your colleagues by Tuesday, November 10 at 8 a.m. Your comments should be substantive and thoughtful. Try to elaborate on your ideas, and explain why you think about things the way you do.
- Many people were particularly upset that Matthew Sheperd was murdered because he was gay. Do you think there's something particularly bad about crime when it's aimed at someone because of their inherent characteristics (like their race, ethnicity, gender) rather than, say, because you got in a fight over something with them? Why or why not?
- One of the characters mentions that he thinks the men who committed the crime should be our teachers - that we should learn from them why they reacted the way they did and had the ideas they had. What ideas and assumptions do you think they had, that made them react the way they did to Matthew?
image published by Xnatedawgx under a creative commons attribution/share alike license
My response to #2
ReplyDeleteI think it was the way they were brought up as a child. The people there seem to be old school and Christians so I assume homosexuality is wrong according to their beliefs. Since the bible says homosexuality is wrong, people believe that it is wrong. As time goes, people start enforcing that belief to their society, and even though one may not believe too much on the bible, their beliefs about homosexuality is that it is wrong based on their society. They also may have added some extras to scare them like, you'll go to hell, be teased, be hated upon, or some kind of violent action will happen to them if they were gay by other people or their parents. With this on their mind, they will grow up with some kind of hatred or fear towards homosexuals and act accordingly from their experience. The two boys that beat him up may have had some experience in the past like their parents beat them for acting gay or were beaten or teased at from friends and others, which is probably why the act violent towards homosexuals. So I believe it was how they were brought up as a child that made them do what they did.
As for them being the teachers, people should learn a lot from it like, kids reflect what thier parents do and what society has done to influence them to do certain things. So they should blame all not one for acting the way they acted. If people don't like evil they should not do evil.
ReplyDeleteMy answer to question #1
ReplyDeleteHate crimes are particularly heinous crimes and I believe they are more damaging than random acts of violence. Most people who commit hate crimes are doing so as they want to send a message to members of a certain group that they are unwelcome in a particular place. These are message crimes meant to intimidate others to comply with someone’s view and instill fear in them if they do not comply. For example, a few weeks ago, a biracial couple in Moraga, California woke one morning to find a cloth wrapped cross with KKK written on it in their driveway. Someone was trying to send them the message that they were not welcome in the neighborhood.
Hate crimes leave the victims with intense feelings of vulnerability, anger, depression and many other post traumatic symptoms. But not only are these felt by the victim but they are also felt by the victim’s community. Hate crimes intimidate the members of the victim’s community, making them feel isolated, vulnerable and not protected. In the example above it is likely that the biracial couple would have felt these feelings after the attack, but we must also understand that given the nature of this crime many other biracial couples in the neighborhood would have felt vulnerable and unwelcome as well. After all that is the main reason why people perform hate crimes – to send a message of terror to the entire group.
My answer to Q.#1...
ReplyDeleteFirst I’d like to say that the guys that committed the crime must have been under the influence of alcohol, it wasn’t mentioned in the movie, but it wasn’t denied. Being drunk, or semi drunk, someone can do some crazy stuff.
Now, let’s say that these guys were raised disliking gay people for what their parents, their models, had taught them, and in a society that they have the cowboy figure in mind, so they must believed that gay people doesn’t fit in their society. May be they thought that hurting a gay person they were going to start a revolution ageist gay people, who knows?
They character that said that they were teacher, and we should learn from them, sound to be a person that was raised the same way, just like the Pastor, myself, and others. It was not right what the guys did, judged by entire world and God, but it is not right to be gay. God made man and women, that’s it!
Thanks for getting us started, y'all.
ReplyDeleteJosef, good points about the fact that there's often a social demand that boys distance themselves from the feminine and "prove" they're not "sissies." So they may have felt their identity threatened b/c of their upbringing.
Apropos of Carolyn's comments, there's a fairly good discussion of hate crime laws in this thread in the Atlantic that you might find interesting: http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/05/hate_crime_laws.php
Daniel, it's not clear to me what relevance your final two sentences have to the topic. Try to concentrate more on the specific questions, please, to explain your reasoning in detail, and to remember one of the central points from Euthyphro - for an issue of civil ethics, only make arguments that people can accept regardless of whether and what religious authorities they recognize. Appeals to a supreme being can't be adjudicated and argued, so stick to points that can be.
Everyone, I'm sure this doesn't need to be said, but just to emphasize: this topic clearly has the possibility to get very touchy, so please be extra careful to treat everyone with respect and courtesy.
Responding To Question 1
ReplyDeleteAlot of people have issues with the gay community for whatever reason but i dont not believe it is in anyway right to beat,murder,or even make fun of another person just for the lifestyle they have chosen to live. its like me saying im goin to kill everyone that wears glasses its so many people who wear glasses in the world, does that give me the right to go hate on the because they're different...not at all its the same concept, yes, he was gay no, he didnt hide it but that is enough reson to kill an individual. i have a gay bestfriend, im scared for him everyday because im not sure if this will be the day that some ignorant person will get their jollies off by torturing him. if matthew shepherd did make a pass at him and invaded his private places he was wrong and out of line but there are other ways to get someone to see your point and to see that you are very serious.
Question 2
ReplyDeleteYes, there is something wrong when you focus on someone’s characteristics like race, gender or ethnicity. When we only look at these characteristics we loose focus of that person as a human being. I would think this form of hatred would start to build because of that characteristic, if you can’t avoid them. I suppose hate is such a strong word to use towards any specific person that it’s such a strong emotion could even cloud our judgment. When we loose focus and our under the influence of anything that could impair our judgment like alcohol. Then the deeply routed feeling of hate would probably show its ugly head. I see the idea of fighting over something usually is trying to bring an outcome to end something you dislike. So when we see that community see what you did was wrong we would probably try to justify what we did. This wouldn’t surprise me that this feeling of what to hate starts at a young age. We are influenced by media, family, and friends and if we grow up thinking that something is wrong with a specific characteristic then I can see that as the start of teaching hate. So we must try to understand the origins of hate in order to understand it and possibly change it.
http://www.calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_generic.jsp?sCategoryPath=/Home/Public%20Services/Consumer%20Information/Pamphlets&sImagePath=Hate_Crimes.gif&sCatHtmlPath=html/Pamphlets_Hate-Crimes.html&sFileType=HTML&sHeading=Hate%20Crimes
Some feared that Matthew Shepherds case in 1998 was going to be treated like Harvey Milks case back in 1978. Both these men were open about their sexuality and both were murdered. In Harvey Milk’s case the accused got away with voluntary manslaughter now called the “Twinkie Defense” because he ate too much junk food. This sparked uproar with LGBT community as well.
“Being drunk, or semi drunk, someone can do some crazy stuff.”
-Daniel-
I agree that the fact they all met in a bar, does add to the case. People under the influence do crazy stuff all the time. Whether or not they were all drunk doesn’t change the fact that a man was brutally beaten and left for dead. Using alcohol irresponsibly doesn’t diminish the accountability of the crime. If anything it demonstrates an inherent liability.
“If Matthew Shepherd did make a pass at him and invaded his private places he was wrong and out of line.”
-GregW-
The bartender stated that the two men came up to Matthew Shepherd and Matthew was sitting alone the entire time he was at the bar. The two men invited Matthew Shepherd to play some pool with them, and then asked him to get into their truck with them. Even if Matthew made any kind of pass at either of the men, why would those two boys give a stranger at a bar, that is drinking a lone, a ride anywhere? Aaron McKinney called Matthew a queer in the police report and showing that Aaron doesn’t see Matthew as nothing more than that.
I believe any crime in general is pretty bad but I do think there's something particularly bad about crime when it's aimed at someone because of their inherent characteristics. Disliking a person because of their skin color or because of their gender or in Matthew's case, his sexuality is just morally and ethically wrong especially if that someone isn't harming you in anyway. It's basically harming someone who probably did nothing to you and if that's not bad, or illegal then I don't know what is. Hating and committing a crime against someone because of their inherent characteristics is plain ridiculous and ones actions shouldn't even go to the point where a crime has been committed like for example taking Matthew Sheperd to his death. Thankfully there's laws now to protect individuals, reduce violence and deaths from the hate.
ReplyDeleteShea S.: Question 1-
ReplyDeleteI think that when a crime is committed against someone because of their inherent characteristics it’s more offensive than a crime committed against someone for their actions. This is because a person doesn’t have any power over how their inherent characteristics present themselves. You can change your actions relatively easy. It’s near impossible to change your inherent characteristics. The words your say don’t make you who you are as much as your physical self makes you who you are. To be attacked for your physical self is worse than being attacked for something less tangible like words or actions.
#1
ReplyDeleteThere's something particularly bad about crime when it's aimed at someone because of their inherent characteristics because the person that is the target has no control over things such as their race or gender. No one has the right to act on their personal feelings when it has to do with inherent characteristics because they are then only picking on a specific group that has done nothing wrong to them personally.
In America everyone has the right to live their life as they choose to. For example, many Americans look down upon those that have more than one wife or the different religious sects that believe their lifestyle is correct and live in a seperate community that is shut off from others. Although many Americans disagree with these two examples, it does not give them the right to committ a crime against them. Everyone can have their own opinion, but it is wrong for one to then act upon that view on the grounds that they disagree with their lifestyle. Once a crime is committed, that is then taking the issue one step too far.
It's different if two people get into a fight over something and someone deliberatley beating someone because they are gay. Once a crime is committed because that person is gay, it takes the situation to another level because if it was ok, then everyone would have the right to act upon their dislikes. As stated before, Americans have the right to live their life as they choose and for someone to committ a crime towards someone because they disagree with their lifestyle is wrong. People should be able to be their own person and live their life as they see fit, instead of being afraid that someone might committ a hate crime against them. If every American chose to act upon their dislikes there would be total chaois.
Response to #2:
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the Priest that they need to be our teachers. The elephant in the room is only visible when some tragic happens. We need to learn from these incidents to help prevent them from happening again. In other words, we need to know our past to respond in the present and change our future. I think the main reason these boys acted this way is not only because of the religious perspective of gays, but because of the gender roles on society. Religion does play a big role in the issue of homophobia, but gender roles in America take it to that next step. Men do not hug, or hug directly, because it is seen as being “gay”. We have this concept of what a man must be and if he doesn’t fit into that stereotypical box then he is a woman or a fag. Men believe that they must constantly prove to other men that they are a man and that they are straight. If a man isn’t always on guard of his actions then his sexuality is questioned which is a huge insult to identity as a man. It is only human to become defensive when our sense of identity is being attacked by others. Being called a “fag” or a “bitch” or “p***y” are some of the most offensive insults to a guy. It is the fear of being associated with being gay that causes a lot of guys to lash out against gay men. I noticed that a few guys in the film mentioned that they had no problem with gay people as long as they didn’t flaunt it around or if they kept their “gayness” to themselves. I don’t believe that Matthew hit on the guys but I could understand the anger the guys would feel if Matthew did. To them, having a gay man flirt with them would be the ultimate slap in the face to their manhood. Advances from a gay man would have been questioning their manhood, their identity, their sense of self. The boys would feel the need to protect their identity but the way they went about it was completely unnecessary and wrong. Even though it is natural to protect our concept of self, attacking others to maintain our identity is never a right response. I feel as a society we need to redefine our gender roles and make it clear that gayness isn’t associated with being a woman or being less than a man. Being a man is more than who you sleep with and how tough you are. The so-called characteristics of a man shouldn’t be the only ones to change. Our perspectives of what it means to be a woman, a gay man, a lesbian, a bi-sexual, etc. should all be changed. I don’t know if Matthew would still be alive today if Aaron and Russell had a different on what it means to be a man, but I think that it would have changed their perspective on gay men. By changing the beliefs of who we must be, we will change how we see others which will lead to more understanding. Hatred is a part of ignorance. Ignorance isn’t always a bad thing considering that we are all ignorant about something in one way or another, but knowledge is what leads to understanding a less fear. Most people hate because they are afraid. They do not understand and anger is their way of protecting themselves. The boys’ hatred of gay men can also come from a lack of understating of what it means to be gay. It is only through proper education that we can help prevent more attacks on people of the LGBT community.
Note: My openly gay best friend was murdered by 8 guys in a very horrific way so I don’t want my response to be taken as an excuse for the behavior of Aaron and Russell or that it was in some way Matthew’s fault. Thank you.
-Kendra M.
When I think about the first question many different things come to mind. Of course it is wrong that someone would get murdered just because of their characteristics but that does not make it worst than any other murder in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteSomeone who kills someone because their gay is equally wrong to someone killing someone for money. When you go as far as to murder and take the life of a person it doesnt matter if it was a robbery, rape, or hate crime. Just take a look at gangs for a moment. People kill eachother just because you wear a different color or live on the other side of the city. How is any murder worse than the other you still conduct the deadliest sin of taking a life. There is to much hate in the world and racism and hate towards gays is a huge obstacle we must overcome. With that being said a murderer is a murderer in my book the only difference is see in someone taking a life is if it was in self defense or involuntary manslaughter which would not count as murder.
When it come to the second question i read alot of peoples responses and i agree that we should learn from them and find out why they would do this crime. You always learn from other peoples mistakes and i think after a couple years in jail the guilt would have set in and their would be alot more remorse for why they had committed the crime.
ReplyDeleteIn order for us to overcome this hatred we must first try and understand it through the eyes of the people who hate. We have to learn why they hate to stop it.The assumption is that the two boys murdered Matt because the fear of him coming onto him and giving them aids or taking their manhood. It was all fear and hate for gays that motivated these two men to conduct this hate crime.
I like janelles response to the first question and even though i responded on the other side of the argument I do agree with many of her points as well as others that have responded like her.
ReplyDeleteIt makes me sick to my stomach to hear of such hate crimes as the one that is shown in this film. Although hate crimes are sickening it just doesnt elevate a murder to me. People get killed in dice games or murdered for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Since there is so many was a person can get murdered for reasons other than your charateristics i have to say a murder is a murder.
Responses:
ReplyDeleteDaniel said:
“First I’d like to say that the guys that committed the crime must have been under the influence of alcohol, it wasn’t mentioned in the movie, but it wasn’t denied. Being drunk, or semi drunk, someone can do some crazy stuff.”
I disagree that they must have been drunk. They obviously planned this out and even their girlfriend’s stated that they planned to rob a gay man. Yes people do stupid stuff when they are drunk but I feel this was pre-meditated murder. I don’t know if murder was part of the original plan but they thought this through before they approached Matthew. The boys were obviously lucid enough the tie him to a fence and still beat him. They even asked him to repeat the license plate number to see if Matthew could identify him. They also drove off and left him there. The fact that they were drinking shouldn’t even be a factor in this case. Matthew was thinking you and you could argue that Matthew came on to the guys because he wasn’t completely lucid but I think that whole argument is full of it also. I think you were leaning a little too close to the Twinkie Defense.
FYI I respect the freedom of speech and all its glory and horror. I believe the KKK has the right to say they hate blacks, gays, Jews, etc and you had the right to state your beliefs about gays. I also believe that the boys had a right to openly talk about hating gays. It’s their right as American citizens. They however, did not have the right, drunk or not, to pistol whip Matthew Sheppard, tie him to a fence, beat him some more, and leave him for dead out in the middle of nowhere. To say that alcohol influenced this is an insult to the LGBT community and to anybody else that is a victim of a hate crime. But again, this is just me exercising my First Amendment Rights.
Chrisgoodlow said:
“ …i think after a couple years in jail the guilt would have set in and their would be alot more remorse for why they had committed the crime.”
I agree. I believe the boys weren’t really remorseful for killing Matthew. I think they are only sorry for doing it and having gotten caught and sentenced to jail. There is no sadness for Matthew but only their selfish regret of having to spend the rest of their lives in jail away from their families and loved ones. Eventually, after starring at their cell for a while the fact that they took a real human life will set in and their healing and acceptance of the event will begin. I hope the father’s speech got through to them but if not, it will eventually eat them alive. I have so much respect for Matthew’s family because it takes a lot to show mercy to someone that doesn’t even seem to feel sorry for taking away their son. Hopefully the boys will come out with the absolute truth of the motives behind Matthew’s death later on.
-Kendra M.
My response is to question 1:
ReplyDeleteI feel that crimes against people for their race, gender, sexuality and etc are far more serious than crimes that are committed over an arguement. My reason being, you can't choose if you a boy or girl, you can't chose if you are black, white, latino, asian, or any other races and the same is true that you can't chose who you are attracted to. Matthew didn't CHOOSE to be gay, he was born that way. But if it was a disagreement, then it wouldn't be so bad. In my eyes I see that starting or instigating a fight has more of a reason to it, though it is still NOT ok to kill anyone ever. If Matthew had started an arguement with the two men, it wouldn't have been such a huge media attraction, but the combining facts that Matthew did not start anything, and that it was the simple fact that he was a gay man, is what fed the media frenzy. So I guess what I am trying to say is that killing someone just because they are gay is a bigger crime than killing someone in the heat of an arguement.
Carolyn:
ReplyDeleteYou brought up a good point, I hadn't thought about hate crimes being used as a warning to other people like the person the crime was committed against. If the two men were trying to send a message to all the gay and lesbian people in Laramie, they sure got thier message out. I just think that it was a cruel way to do it. I don't think it was just sending a message, I think they had something twisted in thier minds.
Kendra:
I see what you are saying about men protecting their manhood and everything, because one of my brothers seems to be extremely homophobic because I have quite a few openly gay and lesbian friends and he told me that if I ever brought them over he would lock himself in his room and wouldnt come out until they leave. But I really don't see that as a rational reason to act out against them. Unless someone has done something to you (gay or straight) I don't see any reason to even send out any bad messages. Religon or homophobia can not be used as an excuse to treat gay people differently than straight people.
Great job, everyone - you've done a very nice job of articulating arguments for both views.
ReplyDeleteBetween you, you've identified some great Kantian, Utilitarian, and Communitarian arguments for why hate crimes are genuinely more damaging or morally worse than the other crimes. Carolyn pointed out that hate crimes generally target the entire group of people who share the immediate victim's salient characteristics (in the context of the crime), and thus are a form of social domination and terror.
Kelly (Star) articulated the Kantian argument nicely: targeting someone for their characteristics dehumanizes them - refuses to recognize them as an individual person, but treats them as a mere symbol of the larger group.
Janelle points out that it violates a basic social agreement that we don't interfere in someone's behavior even if we personally disapprove of it (not that Janelle or anyone else has expressed disapproval, but this is a more general point that's being *applied* to the particular case), so long as that person is not harming anyone else. Further, she points out that by undertaking extralegal violence out of a moral diapproval that's very much up for debate, the criminals seriously undermine the rule of law.
On the other hand, Chris makes the argument that, since the outcome (loss of life) is the same in any case, the particular motives of the criminals don't aggravate the depth of the crime.
In terms of what the experience should teach us, Kendra has done a nice job of pointing out that contemporary upbringing for boys usually includes vicious lessons in the need to distance themselves from the feminine, and to establish an identity that disdains anything we've defined as being "feminine." Thus, there's a threat to identity posed by the very existence of men who refuse to take on that identity. She points it out to criticize the definitions of masculinity that cause such an unstable identity, not to criticize those who refuse to adapt it.
That's a good insight into why the men reacted with such horrifying violence to Matthew's very existence or, at the very most (if the men's testimony is true), a minor (if rude) sexual advance.
Just to make it clear, everyone: Kendra is not arguing that the threat to identity posed by homophobia is a reason for violence, or an excuse. She's saying that one of the things we should learn from the incident is that our contemporary rearing of boys instills a deep seated fear of being identified as "feminine" or a "sissy," and that, consequently, that *upbringing* seriously contributes to this type of violence. It's an answer to question 2.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Chris I can see when it comes to murder how you can argue that the act should be treated the same no matter what the reason behind it. You commit murder you get sent to prison and that is that. But we have a judicial system that has made it clear that we need to look at the motive of every crime and that punishment is determined based on motive. There is no clear cut formula in our system that says oh you killed 1 person you get 20 years, you killed 2-4 you get 30 years etc. What we have is a systems that looks at the circumstances and intent of the person who murders and the punishment is judged accordingly. Given our system (which I do not see as changing any time soon) I believe we need to have laws that deem some crimes more punishable than others based on the intent of the crime so we set some guidelines to those sitting on juries. Otherwise you will have juries judging based on their own biases to race, religion, sexuality etc.
ReplyDeleteOne of the themes in the discussions above is how McKinney started the attacks because Sheppard made a pass at him and this went against his religious and conservative upbringing. Another twist on this is that McKinney may have been dealing with his own conflicts of sexuality. In a 20/20 interview in November 2004 a male friend of McKinney admitted that McKinney was bisexual and that he had a three-way with McKinney and another girl. McKinney's girlfriend at the time also admits that McKinney was always trying to get her to have three-ways with other guys.
ReplyDeleteWhile McKinney denied any gay tendencies,if they did exist then I am sure in the environment he grew up it would have been difficult for him to come out. If McKinney lived in a society where everyone felt safe and welcomed no matter what their sexuality then maybe this horrific event never would have happened. Thus the lesson here is that we need a society that accepts each other no matter what their sexuality.
Response to Ashvin.
ReplyDeleteSince there are laws now about hate crimes, do you think people might take advantage of these laws? For example, if a gay person knows they are protected by hate crime laws, they might think they can touch or harass any person they like and know they can get away with it because if that person they violate does something back let's say defends him/herself in any way, the laws would probably be on the gay persons side, but the gay person started it. I point this out because it might be possible that Matthew may have touched Aaron and Aaron felt violated and did what he did because of that. I'm not saying he is right for beating him up, I'm just saying that the one who starts it is wrong.
Response to Chris.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think everyone focuses all their attention when it comes to a homosexual getting murdered compared to other murders like gangs? What do you think will happen if it was a gay on gay crime, will it have the same media attention?
Answering question 2:
ReplyDeleteA hate crime is a hate crime. Aaron Mckinney and Russell Henderson knew exactly what they were doing. Thus, I have to agree with Matt Galloway the bartender who saw aaron and russell walk up to matthew and pretending to be a friend and offered a ride home. Matt knew matthew and knows his personality and matt said that matthew was just enjoying his own company, drinking by himself is what he normally does. So why would matthew walk up to aaron and russell. Even if matthew did touch aaron which I do not believe, Aaron and Russell had no right to tie up matthew against a fence and beat him until he was dead, plus have the dignity to leave him their helpless of himself. Aaron and Russell showed no compassion for another human being. So why would the Laramie show compassion for Aaron and Russell. These men just didn't want to be caught for what they did, so they wouldn't have to face the consequence. However, they did and in order to not face a harsh sentence they make up a fake story just how any other criminal would.
Aaron and Russell did grow up to the old country style just like the rest of Laramie. They were brought up chritians and that a man and a woman were to be together. That is how the bible protrays it. Although, they were not bought up to kill another person based on their lifestyle. If Aaron and Russell did follow the bible, they would've followed the part where that "Thou shalt not kill". Other Laramie residents said that they did not agree with dating the same sex, but they didn't care if you lived their or was friends with someone who is gay.
I think there is something more wrong when it comes to hate crimes because you are committing a crime is based on their personal life and you also involve people of that community because they are represented as that as well, even if they are not that way. Like for example, there is many gangs and killing in Richmond and I have friends who live in another state and every time she hears about a killing or something se calls me and says dang your city is really bad how do u live and get along with people. Just because someone kills another person in a certain area does not mean everyone is like that too. It was just that bad thing that happen. However, if it is a hate crime it is going to widely known. Especially for Laramie Wyoming it was a small town.
Amy Gomez
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2.
ReplyDeleteI think that the reason for this type of crime is caused by how one was raised and the influence around them. Their upbringing plays key points in their development to this crime. I assume that being raised in a financially unstable household with maybe abusive parents causes psychological problems in the development of learning of moral values, discipline, and principles. Where hate, neglect, violence, crime, animosity, “the bad” can easily flourish in that type of environment. I think that they were not able to establish certain moral principle because they had the lack of resources. Community influences and beliefs also contribute and promote a standard guideline for what’s right and wrong in their confined community. If the majority of the people agree that homosexuality is wrong then it conjures up an unpleasant image that would not be accepted and sometimes would not be tolerated by the community which in turn becomes problematic. The town’s people are very traditional where they believe a man should be with a woman not same gender. So tension arises when they do encounter a gay. I think that both men felt uncomfortable encountering someone that’s confident about his sexuality preference. They felt that it offends them to be around someone that had that preference. They felt like it’s a threat to them and the community they live in because they don’t agree on those preferences. This is what they know and learned while growing up so the only way to get rid of a threat is to dehumanize him to the point where maybe they can change his perception by a beating. “To teach him a lesson about being gay”. Maybe a beating was what they knew while growing up . So maybe they decided to imply this method towards Matthew to see if they can make him change his point of views.. I don’t think there intension was to kill him but just to beat him down. But they ended up killing him. Which is totally wrong to commit a crime against a person because of different outlooks in lifestyle or preference. I think crime helps us dissect reasons why people act the way they do towards others so we can learn from there experiences to explore new heights in how we judge others or how we should treat others even thought we don’t agree or share same views. And that crime is serious so people should really take issues into consideration.
R: Kendra
I do agree that being called names is most offensive towards a guys pride. We guys have a certain code that we stand by. Possibly In Matthews case the two boys might have felt that just being around a gay person threaten that pride of there’s . like having someone that’s gay present cause indirect insults to them as being straight men. people tend to think that way. They tend to feel like “why are you here, your gay and this is a straight joint.” People tend to overreact just because people have different views. So good point about pride.
R: Amy g
I agree on your point “you are representing people in the community” In the case of Matthew. Some of the people felt offended such as the Doctor when the crime was magnified into the mass media. He felt offended because it happened in his town by the people he knew. Reason maybe he felt offended was that, that was his town! That town was his home and that town represents him. So for a resident to commit a hate crime it offends him because he feels that they don’t have people like that in his town. Or like what the shop owner states “that we don’t raise children like that, but then again we do” it shows that people represents the communities. Good point about affects on the Community.
this is in response to gregw.
ReplyDeletei agree with you, just because some people live different lifestyles doesnt mean they are a threat to christianity. However, religion is a powerful tool thats often deeply intertwined with a persons life. The boys were just misled individuals.
response to chrisgoodlow
"In order for us to overcome this hatred we must first try and understand it through the eyes of the people we hate"
I definately agree with your statement. If a person irrationally hates a certain group of people they must still try and analyze their situation as well as take into account that everyone is different. just because you do certain things this or that way doesnt mean it works for everyone.
Average temperature in Wyoming in October is 35 degrees, so leaving someone tied up overnight will almost certainly guarantee their death of hypothermia.
ReplyDeleteShea S.:
ReplyDeleteIn response to Josef, I think that the murder of a homosexual received more media attention because of the brutality of the crime, and the relative rareness of the cause of the attack that was carried out because of the victim’s sexual orientation. While gang shootings are tragic as well, they are probably less focused on because they occur much more often and are less rare. Also gang shootings probably are about turf disputes or other gang related stuff and not about sexual orientation. And as for a gay on gay crime receiving the same media attention, I’m not sure because there could be many factors in the scenario. I think most hate crimes are so appalling they receive some coverage.
In response to Roberto Torres, I think that when a person commits a crime, or hate crime, they are revealing their true self, their deep down ways and tendencies that were ingrained in them probably from an early age. I’d agree that the environment a kid is raised in can be a force for good or a destructive force. If you’re raised in a house with bigotry, then that’s all you know until you can think for yourself, and even then your past will remain a part of you. People can change for sure, but being raised to believe a certain thing is right or wrong, will make it harder to get those preconceived notions out of your head. Your rearing definitely determines your morals and values.
In response to Ashvin. . .
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statements because a crime is much more severe if it is committed towards someone because of their
inherent characsteristics. I also agree with your statement that harming someone for what they choose to be or believe in is morally and ethically wrong. In Matthew Shepard's case I believe the crime was wrong because he was killed because the murderers didnt approve of him and the way he displayed his sexuality. I think it is also wrong because Matthew didnt provoke or harm the boys physically in any way, so they cant say they committed the crime in self defense. They simply committed the crime out of hatred and prejudice toward another individual. They deserved the sentence they got because harming an individual for who they are or what they believe in is morally wrong and should not go unpunished.
In response to Carolyn. . .
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you stated about the crime may have never happened if we lived in a society that accepts eachother no matter what their sexuality the crime may not have been committed in the first place. We live in a society nowadays that is more accepting of bi sexual women, but bi sexual or gay men are still looked down upon and treated with disrespect. This is also morally wrong and it is completely unfair. If society is going to look down on gays or bi sexuals it shouldnt matter if they are male or female. Nowadays men see a bi sexual or gay woman as being something "sexy." Whereas with men it is still seen in a form of disgust.
I feel that the idea that the two perpetrators of this hate crime may have come from homophobic families and that is the reason for thier violence is a cop-out. There are so many people who grew up in racist, homophobic, xenophobic homes that have grown up and adjusted to the real world. It always seems to me that people hat live in small towns where these things happen live in a bubble. That they are not in touch with the rest of humanity. This story is similar to the movie "Boys Don't Cry"
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
ReplyDeleteThe two boys who committed the crime against Matthew Shephard should be our teachers. This is in the sense where we can analyze their actions and learn from their mistakes. As with anything and everything, this is always true and should be done, unless we want history to repeat itself infinitely.
As for their reactions, the causes are numerous. Many of our classmates go toward religion and gender roles in society; I agree with these causes as well. Religion has always played a big part in how groups of people view other individuals in society; particularly the LGBT community. Although there are many religious people who are tolerant; there are still many individuals (such as Phelps in the film) who express intolerance, or even hatred toward their way of life and preferences. As everyone already knows, when the church had greater power way back then, gays would be prosecuted for being simply who they were, so they had to hide the fact that they had a different sexuality from everyone else. There are still individuals who are old school, to a lower extreme.
Gender roles are affected by religion and play a huge part as well. Basically, a guy has to fit the image of a man, they have to be mentally tough, show little pain, and like women (just to name a few). If they don't show this, they run the risk of being called a fag or a sissy; which is pretty much offensive. This all starts when a boy is a teenager, which is around the time where he's trying to find his identity. From then on, he always has to prove that he is tough, and that he is not gay; or else run the risk of being called gay. He becomes extremely defensive when it comes to actions that heightens that risk to his identity. This could be a possible explanation to the men's reactions to Matt, they said that he tried to make a pass at them, and overexaggerated their response toward something that they felt as "hostile" in a sense. These ideas and concepts were enforcing factors in the lives of these two men in one way or another; which ended with the gross violent actions against Matthew Shephard.
Although they thought they were defending their identity, violence was never, and will never be the appropriate response to that situation.
I agree with Amy that the two men didn't have a reason to tie Mattthew to a fence and leave him to die. She also makes a good point that the two men were of Christian faith and that one of the commandments are "thou shalt not kill". with this commandment being an important factor in Christianity, both the men can be seen as two people with their morals mixed-up. Amy also uses the city of Richmond as a prime example of how a town or community can be seen a certain way due to an incident or incidents that have happened.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adrian that the two boys should be our teachers. I also agree that men have to protect their sexuality in a sense because an ideal man is supposed to be tough and not "gay". This sterotpye has been around for a long time and although many people think differently now, there is still an idea that a "man should act like a man". Although there is this sterotpye that is instilled in many of us, it still does not give the two boys the right to beat Matthew and leave him tied to a fence. They can be seen as teachers, yet they must still suffer the consequences of their actions.
ReplyDeleteIn response to gregw...
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your comparison to glasses. I have felt the hate before, and it's not nice. Just because people are different that doesn't make them less of a human. I feel that these hate crimes have been going on throughout the years. There is always someone thinking that they are supreme and oppressing people exactly like them??
In response to Adrian...
I agree that we can learn from other prople's mistakes. But I know I would never kill someone so they wouldn't be teachers for me. In the other hand I can learn a lot from Mathew. I learned that eventhough I might be different I should know how and when to be different. This would prevent hate on myself. I can remeber when Obama won the election. I voted yes but the people I worked with didn't and were acting hostile to the election. At this moment I knew that my opinion wasn't the best at that moment. I agreed with them just to keep my job and not create any hate towards me. I wouldn't call it lying just aware of my surroundings. I take Mathew as an example of what not to do. I agree to express yourself but sometimes people don't care and it would be good to be safe.
Janelle R:
ReplyDelete"People should be able to be their own person and live their life as they see fit, instead of being afraid that someone might committ a hate crime against them."
I agree with this statement 100%. That is what living in the United States is about, being able to pursue your dreams in your own way, just as long as you are not causing any harm to others. The LGBT community are not hurting any one, they are simply living their lives just like anyone else. Matthew Shepard was doing the same, he was realizing his potential as a functioning human being in society. It'd be great to have everyone adopt a "live and let live" philosophy, but apparently it is not that easy. Many people are still intolerant to the gay and lesbian community; hopefully this changes soon enough.
Serina S.:
ReplyDelete"So I guess what I am trying to say is that killing someone just because they are gay is a bigger crime than killing someone in the heat of an arguement."
This is true as well. Reason being because killing someone in the heat of the argument is because of circumstance that were given at hand; basically it could have been anybody.
Once you jump to the next situation, killing someone for being gay is a worse crime since you are singling out that one person for their sexuality; their identity. It (hate) was directed specifically for that person and no one else. That is exactly why the press made an even bigger deal out of the crime, the simple fact that they beat him for bieng who he was.
If Matthew Shephard was killed due to an argument, and was identified as a gay man after the fact; would the situation have gotten considerable attention by the outside press?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJanelle R:
ReplyDelete"People should be able to be their own person and live their life as they see fit, instead of being afraid that someone might commit a hate crime against them."
This statement is the best statement in my mind. As long as they are not harming anyone then this life is the life to live!! Each person has their own way of life and they should express it the way they want. If one disagrees with the other then fine, as long as there's no harm done then let it be.
Sorry about that!
ReplyDeleteQuestion #2
I was saying that this story is similar to "Boys Don't Cry" in that this kind of rage and hate seems to be bottled up in small towns. Not to say that hatred and violence don't occur in big cities, just that it always mystifys me that people who are "different" or live an "alternative lifestyle" do not leave to go to places where they will be more accepted. Other than family and money, what would make you stay in a place that you know will not accept you?
In regards to the two perpetrators Aaron and Russell, as I stated earlier, the fact that they were raised in a community / in families that may have been homophobic should not be a defense for these men. Men should know better than to victimize someone doing no one any harm. Personally, I think it was a combination of testosterone, alchohol, and ignorance that drove Aaron and Russell to brutalize Matthew. I think that the verdicts were absolutely correct and just.
The only thing we can learn from Aaron and Russell is to teach our children tolerance, and impulse control.
In response to Adrian C...
ReplyDelete" If they don't show this, they run the risk of being called a fag or a sissy; which is pretty much offensive. This all starts when a boy is a teenager, which is around the time where he's trying to find his identity. From then on, he always has to prove that he is tough, and that he is not gay; or else run the risk of being called gay."
I agree with this. Sadly, either no one taught these guys the old "sticks and stones..." saying, or they just are SO insecure that they have to respond violently to the idea that they might be gay.
"In a 20/20 interview in November 2004 a male friend of McKinney admitted that McKinney was bisexual and that he had a three-way with McKinney and another girl. McKinney's girlfriend at the time also admits that McKinney was always trying to get her to have three-ways with other guys."
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly what I'm saying... It seems to me that the people that respond so violently to gay people, are most likely the one that have at the very least thought about it. Growing up in an Islamic home I heard all about how "homo's" were going to burn and how if I became friends with the I would too... However, being in a hugely diverse high school I had no Idea who was gay, and how that was different from being straight. as it turned out a large majority of my friends "came out" our senior year and we are great friends to this day! I love them and they love me and if through all of that we will burn, then so be it. Love is too hard to find and keep to not be friends with someone because of thier sexual preference!
Response to Shea S.
ReplyDeleteThat totally makes sense. Since there is so many crimes, certain ones do receive more attention than others. But the thing that I ask myself is, should a certain crime have more attention than any other crimes because it is rare or new? I think a crime is a crime and should be treated with the right attention. It seems that people look at crimes (when it happens) as a game or a movie where they can exercise their thoughts and feelings throughout the whole scene in public. I don't see how making one city look bad while the others are good because they don't have some kind of crime like the one that happened in Laramie, will make any difference. Yes new laws will come up but the pain and suffering that city went through will never be erased and people would fear or have a certain feeling towards that town every time they think or go there. When we focus all our attention on one thing, we can either improve it or destroy it.
"Since there are laws now about hate crimes, do you think people might take advantage of these laws? For example, if a gay person knows they are protected by hate crime laws, they might think they can touch or harass any person they like and know they can get away with it because if that person they violate does something back let's say defends him/herself in any way, the laws would probably be on the gay persons side, but the gay person started it. I point this out because it might be possible that Matthew may have touched Aaron and Aaron felt violated and did what he did because of that. I'm not saying he is right for beating him up, I'm just saying that the one who starts it is wrong."
ReplyDelete-Reply to Josef
I don't think people would take advantage of the laws against hate crime. It would be rather silly and even stupid for a homosexual guy/girl to think that he/she can go around touching & harassing whoever they want because the laws are now in effect. I'm sure everyone knows how to behave in public regardless of race, religion, sexuality. But lets say if one nutty gay person (excuse my vague description all) decides to go and harass people around because they think they're protected and that they'll get away with it. Depending on the situation, I don't think the gay person should get away with it but I do see what you're pointing out and how the law may lean towards the gay person and their rights. But I say if someone is feeling harassed or violated, it should be reported without violence and possibly death regardless of the violation. One shouldn't do something so harsh back to the person violating you, especially if your life wasn't in danger or anything because then the violated person could potentially get in trouble for committing something so harsh back to the violator, i.e like killing the crazy violator and in my opinion that harshness borderlines on hate. So if Matthew did touch Aaron's leg (assuming Matthew did in the car) then they could've kicked him out of the car or something instead of beating him so brutally regardless of Matthew making a pass at Aaron. But I do agree with you that it is wrong of someone to start something but it's also wrong of using violence to get back at them.
-Reply to Kelly
"I feel that the idea that the two perpetrators of this hate crime may have come from homophobic families and that is the reason for thier violence is a cop-out. There are so many people who grew up in racist, homophobic, xenophobic homes that have grown up and adjusted to the real world. It always seems to me that people that live in small towns where these things happen live in a bubble. That they are not in touch with the rest of humanity."
I think many should also see the Laramie Project and hopefully can change for the better, especially if there are men and boys out there who come from homophobic families. They could learn and possibly prevent of what could happen if they carry out their actions because of their beliefs/hatred toward another being even if it's not exactly the same situation but something similar.
From Luis T.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the two killers in the movie have their moral "mixed-up". They might have been raised with good morals towards people who were not gay. I have met people who are very nice to me and they treat me with a lot of respect but I have learned that deep down they are taught to hate anything other than what they are. from these experiences I believe that we are capable of lying to the rest of the world. To some extent we are raised to do white lies, here and there.
My other belief is that they could have been unsure of their own sexuality. From my experience the majority of people that are not comfortable with their sexuality tend to over react when approached with a situation like Mathew's. I remeber of a moment when I was in High School PE. There was a guy that always was scared to change infront of other men. He waited until we were all out so he could change. I noticed that every time some other guy walked near him when undressing he would react as if scared to be near anyone? I started to ask him questions to start a conversation. He ended up telling after about a year that he was gay and thought those men were attractive. I could be wrong but from my experiences this is my belief. The killers could of been one of these people described above.
Being victimized in any situation is sad. I can personally testify in my life,as well im sure all of us have been through and seen things that are blatently unjust. In response to the first question crime is bad in all cases but it hurts to see more when it is aimed at someone because of their characteristics is really sad. Crime is complex and has many intricies becuase there are so many different types... Yet the crime of Matthew Sheppard is sad because it reflects that there is still so much hate alive. It is definitley one of the most horrible acts that can be commited.....
ReplyDeleteTonicdust - i agree with you actions speak louder than words this is true. Just because you say somethings does not reflect what your saying is true because the action is the what counts.
I agree with what people have said about representing the community but it brings to mind what exactly can be done to prevent these things from happening. Its like nowadays there is more of a diverse hate there is more different people living side by side in the same place and finding the balance to leave together in peace....
- marcelo
*there is more people with more differences living side by side in the same place, and it is important to find balance and live together in peace.*
ReplyDeleteSorry my first response was to question 1. So heres my response to question 2:
ReplyDeleteOne of the characters said that we should look at Aaron and Russell as teachers of why they reacted the way they did and to learn from that. I think yes they could be an example of how not to react and not to go kill someone just because their gay. I think some of the assumptions that Aaron and Russell had was probably they would play a little game of bulling with Matthew, but it obviously got out of hand. Most definity the Aaron and Russell were mentally sick, also they were drunk. Being mentally sick and drunk has to do a lot with their reactions. However, these men were smart enough to know that when they were beating Matthew up that the way they were doing it was going to kill him, thus, they should've stopped their actions but they didn't. That cost them to go to prison and caused Matthew his life. Aaron and Russell were bullies to Matthew because they knew exactly what they were going to do before they even walked up to Matthew and acted as though they were being friendly to Matthew then plotted to beat him up causing Matthew to die. Matt the bartender did say that before Aaron and Russell walked up to Matthew and had a conversation, Aaron and Russell had went to the bathroom, then came out to Matthew. Aaron and Russell may have been discussing what they were going to do to mess around with Matthew. Even Aaron Mckinney's girlfriend said that, also she had said he would've done that to show to Matthew why you shouldn't make a move on straight men or else you would get beat up. Furthermore, that is exactly what Aaron and Russell did. But what bullying case haven't you heard where someone ended up being killed or killed themselves over the fact. Aaron and Russell are perfect examples of how far bulling can go. Although this was more significant than other cases since Laramie Wyoming is a small town and was probably one of the first hate crime against a gay.
Moreover, it should be widely known because this shows to people from all over the world that this is not right and if you were to ever do it, you will face consequences and justice will be served. Just as any other crime, that anyone will commit you will be served.
Response to Greg W.
ReplyDeleteI agreed with most of what you said, however, I did not agree with the part where you stated that: "if matthew shepherd did make a pass at him and invaded his private places he was wrong and out of line." I do not think Matthew was out of line. Get a girls point of view, there has been times where I am friends with a guy and he gets the wrong idea of my feelings toward him and the guy would try to kiss me or touch me. But I don't go and beat him up or kill him. I would just say, "hey I don't feel the same way, sorry if I ever gave you the wrong signals." Or even a better example, my boyfriend has a best friend who's uncle is gay and my boyfriend was staying over with his best friend at his uncle's house down in Miami, well the uncle invited his friends over they were gay and they really liked my boyfriend, they thought he was so cute. My boyfriend felt uncomfortable but did not want to be rude and just told they guy he wasn't that way and walked away. All in all my boyfriend didn't go beat him up because the guy was gay and thought my boyfriend was cute, instead he just said he wasn't gay. There are better ways to work out the situation. Aaron and Russell could've just had said that they weren't gay and moved on. Then all of this wouldn't have had happened.
Response to Adrian C.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adrian C. 100% especially in the part where he states: “Basically, a guy has to fit the image of a man, they have to be mentally tough, show little pain, and like women (just to name a few). If they don't show this, they run the risk of being called a fag or a sissy; which is pretty much offensive.”
I would have never even thought of this because I am a girl and girls do not go through everything a guy goes through, and hearing this helped me understand other factors that Aaron and Russell could’ve possibly being thinking or going through.
But people do need to stop saying comments like, “Oh that’s hella gay.” Because every time you say that even if your not trying to imply it, you are hurting a certain group. Also, I find myself saying the comments like that sometimes but I try not to. I remember when I played in the play, “The Laramie Project”, my theater teacher said that one of the reasons that she wanted to do the play was to teach others that saying comments like that is consider abuse and you hurt someone when you say that, and we should all try hard not to say comments like that. After that, I tried hard not to say comments regarding gays like that because it is abuse. It’s just the same when people would use Gods name in vein. I even try to tell my friends and peers when they do say things like that, to not say that because it’s hurtful. However, every once in a while I will get a person who would say to me, “You are so dumb”, or say other hurtful things to me. Thus, because of that this is why it’s going to take a very long time for people to stop the abuse. It’s almost like racism, racism is surprisingly still here today in the U.S. and it’s going to stay like that for a long time, until we all take action and completely stop it, little by little each day. So we must do the same for the abuse towards gays and lesbians. Even though when you say comments like that and you do not mean to say it directly toward them, you are and it hurts them and should not be said in the first place.
Amy Gomez
I just wanted to share a little story to you guys.
ReplyDeleteI did "The Laramie Project" play during my senior year and before we could do the play my teacher had to send out permission slips to our parents to ask if we could do the play. Surprisingly one of my friends bought it to her parents attention and they did not want her to do the play because they felt that it was not right to do a play about a gay person since it was against their religion. However, she convince her parents to sign it but the consequence of it was that they were not going to show up. Also, my friend appeared in many of the schools plays but this play, her last play for her senior year her parents did not show up.
In my case, I thought my parents will sign it. However, my parents were against the fact also. I was stunned. I was too in many plays in school and did other true story plays. I could not believe it, my parents were afraid that I was going to be made fun of at school because of it and that I would look bad, thus, they were scared that people might assume I was gay for doing the play. I convince my parents to sign it and they did, plus they showed up to the play and had a change of heart.
Although, there was one night out of all the other nights we did the play where we had a audience that was laughing during the part where they were in court with Aaron and Russell. The audience was laughing at the comments that Aaron and Russell were saying, and it made us cast sick. Because the things that Aaron and Russell say are hurtful things towards gays and here a audience that was laughing at it. Even when I did my part in the play I had to say a few lines and I could hear people laughing at me. As soon as I was done I went backstage and there were my cast members saying the same thing that the audience was laughing at us, and we all were like we are going to act out our parts even harder and not to let this get to us. Out of all the other audience we did not have other audience laughing at Aaron's and Russell's comments towards Matthew especially where the part when the cop shows the tape of Aaron's confession to the jury people were laughing. Even at the end of the play some people I knew came up to me and said,"That was so funny."