Talk:Violence against LGBT people/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Statements by Cardinal Ratzinger

I added a comment on the subject of anti-LGBT violence from Cardinal Ratzinger, who said back in the 1980s that increased rights for the gay community could lead to an undesired backlash of violence against homosexuals. I think this is a relevant quote and that it could rightfully be included as part of the sociological debate on the allegedly religious character of anti-gay violence. ADM (talk) 12:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

No need to belabour the point at all. Surprise, a Catholic Cardinal called homosexuals inherently flawed and stated it was little surprise they were subjected to violence, we get it. Your repeated attempts to conflate LGBT people with pedophilia on numerous talkpages speak for themselves. The content we have in this article sufficient and broadly inclusive to all religions. Holding Ratzinger as an authority cited to the right-wingish Catholic League is indicative of the POV editing that is discouraged. No need to suggest Ratzinger has an authority or expertise and those outdated comments have been widely criticized and disputed by many folks including Catholics who also despise the Catholic League acting as a moral authority. Please avoid using the Catholic League to source anything but their own beliefs. -- Banjeboi 12:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't cite those comments because they were somehow objective or authoritative, but because they had provoked a good deal of debate and discussion among scholars and LGBT activists. Ratzinger's statement would not have been notable if it were not controversial, and very often being controversial is what makes something notable. ADM (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

That justifies adding it to the Ratzinger article and possibly about Catholic attitudes towards LGBT article. -- Banjeboi 13:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Ratzinger's more recent comments would be more relevant (i.e., since he became Pope), and he has condemned such violence I believe. People's views change - just look at the current Archbishop of Canterbury - if Pope Benedict the umpteenth has expressed views on such violence more recently, those are the views that should be cited. Mish (talk) 22:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I still think what we have is fine and quoting the Pope, who leads a religion that has effected violence on LGBT people for centuries, is quite a farce. We don't quote Hitler to expound on Jewish culture nor do we look to George Bush to eloquently related the struggles of the environmental movement. -- Banjeboi 04:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Demographic!!

Is there a chart or listing of highest, most likely area, region, country where gay or lesbiens are more likely to be attacked? If so could it be added to this list. The Greatest Show On Earth (talk) 10:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism and copyright violation

It appears that Benjiboi has committed plagiarism on this article, copying and pasting copyrighted text without making it clear that he was directly quoting the source, the SanDiego 6 News Team: With identical sections shown in bold:

• This article: "Seaman August Provost was found shot to death and his body burned at his guard post on Camp Pendleton.
  • San Diego 6: "…Provost was found shot to death and his body burned at his guard post on Camp Pendleton."

• This article: "A sailor accused of murdering him committed suicide in the base brig a week later”
  • San Diego 6: "A sailor accused of murdering a fellow seaman on duty at Camp Pendleton committed suicide in the base brig."

• This article: "Family and friends believe he was murdered because he was openly gay; the Navy said even though the killer had admitted his deed, they haven't concluded that this is a hate crime."
  • San Diego 6: "Family and friends believe he was murdered because he was an admitted homosexual. The Navy said even though the killer had admitted his deed, they haven't concluded that this is a hate crime."24.22.141.252 (talk) 05:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Benjiboi now edit wars to restore his plagiarized passages.[1]

Once again:

• • This article: "Family and friends believe he was murdered because he was openly gay; the Navy said even though the killer had admitted his deed, they haven't concluded that this is a hate crime."
  • San Diego 6: "Family and friends believe he was murdered because he was an admitted homosexual. The Navy said even though the killer had admitted his deed, they haven't concluded that this is a hate crime."

Benjiboi, please stop stealing other people's work. if you must quote them word for word, then do so, with quotes.24.22.141.252 (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Benjiboi continues to edit war his plagiarism back into the article,[2] while avoiding this discussion on talk.24.22.141.252 (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Now Benjiboi has taken to blanking this section in order to cover up the problem.[3][4]24.22.141.252 (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Theses problems are worth dealing with. I believe be Benjiboi,as an experienced editor we know he is, may volunteer to clean up his own mistakes. --Damiens.rf 18:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I've restored this discussion, which was blanked again, per WP:TALK#Others' comments.24.22.141.252 (talk) 08:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Violence by LGBT against non-LGBT??

Is there a similar article of violence committed or suspected to be committed by LGBT agains non-LGBT? I recall there were some prominent cases where it was complained that such cases did not get much media coverage. Bachcell (talk) 23:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Prominent cases where it was complained that such cases did not get much media coverage? I doubt they'd have been prominently covered if the media didn't cover them. Mish (talk) 23:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, have you any cases you would like to suggest? Those are cases where LGBT attack straight people for being straight? --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The most notable case is Jesse Dirkhising, worldnetdaily headline was "How confused 13-year-old died brutal death as a sex toy" September 23, 2002 1:00 am by Allyson Smith. Lots of complaints that this wasn't given proportionate coverage by the press. Another case that's been stuck pretty buried in ethnic and gay press is the DC Robert Wone case. No suspects have been named, but the 3 housemates have been charged with obstruction of justice. The timing, behavior, and placement of Wone's ex-college buddies makes it at least look like a 3 white gay guys on a straight Asian male assault involving an extensive collection of S&M and beyond devices too radioactive for even WND to cover. I suspect a stand-alone mirror article on such a thin topic suffer a speedy delete, but perhaps a small section in this article would be an appropriate counterbalance. Bachcell (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This article is for, I think, violence against LGBT people for being LGBT. It does not imply that the LGBT's attackers were heterosexual, though for demographic reasons, most usually are. It would be extremely bizarre for LGBT people to attack non-LGBT people for being non-LGBT people, and the cases you have put forth do not demonstrate this, but are little more than murder cases where suspects were understood to be in a same-sex relationship, and this incidental fact was harped on by the right-wing media. They would more appropriately be placed in articles about conservative victimhood and straight white Christian male persecution complex. —the Homosexualist (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

As suggested, there are a number of problems - first the construction of this article is on the basis that the cases discussed are ones where people are attacked or murdered *because* of their sexuality. In the first case you mention, I don't see any mention that they selected him for their heinous crimes *because* he was a heterosexual? The second is equally problematically because, from my quick skim of the article, we'd need to make a lot of inferences about what had actually occurred. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd agree with the two editors, there would need to be something about the attacks being because these people were heterosexual, and targeted by LGBT people because they were heterosexual. Otherwise the scandal of the death in Michael Barrymore's swimming pool would be included - although we don't know who the attacker(s) were, whether the individual who died was straight/bi or closeted-gay, and certainly not whether his sexual orientation was part of the motivation behind the attack. Mish (talk) 00:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Unless sources appear, it appears to be impossible to write anything anyway. BUT, i was suprised to find no section on "gay serial killers" or "Sexual assaults". I thought there were a number of serial killers that were themselves gay or repressed, and targeted gay men out of opportunity or self-hatred, often with sexual assaults. Maybe these are scattered throughout the article, but seem a different phenomenon than the rest of the examples (which seem focused on heterosexuals commiting violent acts against LGBT victims and the resultant hate-crime legislations). Likewise, i've read that LGBT people are far more likely to be victim of sexual abuse or assaults (pften by supposedly straight men), which should be covered here.

I remember this case of a guys arranging a meeting on the internet so one could be emaculated and they could eat his penis together before he was killed (all on video) [5] [6]. Such cases should be in this article, as the "victim" was chosen as he was gay, or the title changed so it is clear that only a specific type of violence is covered (straight against gay hate crimes). I'll make a section on serial killers soon, as i assume it is just an oversight, rather than an attempt to make this article a gay rights coatrack.

ewwwwwwBachcell (talk) 14:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I also think some sub-articles are needed here - the list of attacks does not make a good article for readers interested in the overall phenomenon, and though the larger number of entries from the US and UK and from recent years is understandable, it unbalances the article terribly. Any objection to making it a prose section, summarising a "List of violent incidents against LGBT people" type article?YobMod 11:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem with that at all - I had that in mind a few months ago but my experiences on a similar article told me that it would go down fairly badly coming from me the great homophobe. Hopefully you will better luck. --Cameron Scott (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

There is a discussion about the inclusion of serial killers in the archive - the consensus was that the article was about people being targeted for homophobic violence, regardless of whether they were gay or not. Proving that people ate people because of some gay thing is a bit difficult to establish reliably in sources.

I did go to some trouble to remove the country-specific information from the big-list that this article was originally. I worked on presenting the UK information as an outline narrative, showing the relationship between notable attacks and subsequent changes in policing and legislation. If you feel you can turn that into prose, I have no problem with that. The USA section is the biggest problem, as just about any event anybody has ever heard about gets thrown in there. It would be great if that could be converted into prose in some way, but there is so much detail you can't really see the wood for the trees. As it happens, I think that the Cameron's edits were helping improve the article, once I understood what he was trying to, but I guess lists of dead people are a bit of an emotional trigger for some people. Mish (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Seeing this made me think of this article - do we have any idea how to make it flow better? --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I posted a similar suggestion about violence by LGBT after a Bi-sexual woman was found guilty of having her lesbian lover kill the bi-sexual's boyfriend.

I was met with an attack to have me banned which is ongoing. [[7]]

Your input is welcomed.

As was also disucessed about serial gay killers, have we so quickly forgotten about about the killing of the great Italian Designer Gianni Versace by Andrew Cunanan.

Again when I suggested a similar correction to the entry I was met with an attack to have me banned which is ongoing. Are you aware of this ? [[8]]

I agree with the person who posted this...the current entry is unfair, unbalanced and neutral.

--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Violence against LGBT people by LGBT people

The article as it currenlty stands polarizes the issue, by suggesting that all violence against LGBT people is by non LGBT people, when in some cases the abuser and victim are both of the LGBT group.

--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Caesar, my apologies for reverting your earlier edits to this talk page. I somehow misread them as edits to the article itself and wouldn't have reverted them if I'd been paying proper attention. That said, I'll just note that I agree with the gist of what you say above, although I don't necessarily agree that the article polarizes the issue. Also, the CBC article you linked makes no mention of the sexual orientation of any of the players. For the item to fit with the title of this article, the victim would have to be reliably sourced as LGBT. Rivertorch (talk) 05:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

• • Just thought you should know that my attempt at making a suggestion to improve the 'fairness' of the article has met with some attemtps at censoring my talk on the issue. I do not think this article is fair, it may be true, but not fair, as it polarizes the issue of violence between LBGT people and others.

• • As to the CBC link, some of the CAnadian respondents have complained about the lack of publicity this event was given.

--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 03:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• A most notable case involved a bisexual women who killed her boyfriend, by becoming involved with a lesbian woman,Bisexual Girlfriend found guilty of axe murder

I will try to find another link. The fact as you say that the CBC does not make mention of the sexual orientation, (while other sites do) shows how censorship of this situation is quite prominent in North America, or at least Canada...

[http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/12/03/12029566.html Guilty verdict in lesbian axe murder ]

This article in the Toronto Sun makes mention of a lesbian, (the CBC report states same sex. Another article title refers to a bi-sexual woman. (good case study for political correctness ?)

Toronto woman in court in bisexual love-triangle murder case

This article must remove gender or orientation biases.

--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 05:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

• • What about the killing of the great Italian DesignerGianni Versace by Andrew Cunanan.

--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 03:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• I hesitate to even bother responding, but the focus of this article is violence committed against LGBT people because they're LGBT. It's not an article about every crime committed against an LGBT. Andrew Cunanan didn't kill Gianni Versace because he hated gay people. He killed him because he was obsessed. AniMate 05:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

• • It is not just about violence against LGBT people 'because' they are LGBT - nor is it exhaustive. It is subject to criteria of verifiability, and it includes people who may not be LGBT, but who are perceived as LGBT, and subjected to violence on that basis. Somebody who kills a former lover is not killing them because either they or the lover are LGBT or not LGBT, but for other reasons. Serial killers are already well catered for in the article on serial killers - regardless of sexual orientation. If LGBT relationships that end up in a murder were to be included, they would be included in an article connected to domestic violence, which would be predominently about men killing the women they live with. The significance of the violence in this article is that it is recognised as driven by homophobia, and is classified as a hate crime. There are many entries that have been removed from this article because they involve killing or violence against LGBT people, but they are not shown to have a proven basis that the violence was motivated by hatred of LGBT people. None of the examples you cite seem to fulfill this criteria - although if you have sources that show that Versace was killed because he was gay (or perceived so), and the crime was motivated by hatred of LGBT people, by all means let us have that so we can include this here. Mish (talk) 04:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I complete agree with the above statement. --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Clearer connection between religion/violence needed

The lead is currently problematic in how it makes a bunch of seemingly related assertions to give a general picture. I'm not saying it's wrong, but this part needs attention: "A variety of religious groups as well as proponents of extremist political ideologies condemn homosexuality and relate it to being weak, ill, feminine, and morally wrong." This connects "religious groups" and "extremist political ideologies" without doing so explicitly. It also connects religious condemnation of homosexuality with violence against homosexuals, without clearly articulating how the two are related.

Presumably the Church's condemnation of homosexuality is on what they regard as moral grounds, and does not include a call to violence. Certainly, the argument has been waged that their condemnations lead to violence. But this needs to be very clearly delineated in the lead, so as not to give a misleading impression (as it does currently). The Sound and the Fury (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

This is dealt with in the body text, although I agree that this is not a concise summary.

• Homophobic violence is thought to be socially determined. Some suggest that religion has had a role in fostering cultures that give rise to homophobic violence; today, Christian leaders in the West who regard homosexuality as a sin usually denounce violence against LGBT people. Extremist political ideologies often condemn homosexuality, relating it to being weak, ill, effeminate, and morally wrong, and this is seen as a motivation for violence.

Will that adress the concern? As this is addressed in the text, I am not duplicating the sources. Mish (talk) 16:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Of course, this does not address those religions and religious leaders who explicitly call for violence against LGBT people - which does happen in the UK, the Middle East, and parts of Africa. In some cases these are religious leaders whose religious views are also extreme political ideologies, often calling for mass murder of civilians on religious and polical grounds (less common in the UK, as this is now illegal), and who publicly call for such violence to be normalised. Mish (talk) 16:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Split this article?

It seems that the US and UK sections are getting very long as compared to the other countries, the US in particular. It's likely due to the fact that most of the contributors are from those countries, and/or they are better publicized. They're becoming cumbersome and I suggest they should be made into their own articles, per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Splitting_article Klopek007 (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion: As per my comments below, perhaps the exemplary incidents should be split to their own article, but instead of keeping all of those incidents, perhaps just notable incidents, like ones that sparked changes in law or were particularly gruesome or involved people otherwise notable (politicians, celebrities, etc)? Run-on sentence, sorry. Anyway, you can find the links in my comments below, but I've begun to work on fleshing out this article and will soon be working on the proposed split article. Any and all input is welcome! Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 19:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, they would better off deleted. The laundry lists this article contains are not encyclopaedic. --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Rastas

Beenie man is not a Rasta. The crossover has made here between certain Rasta order (majorly Bobo Ashanti) and its artists, a phenomena called "Murder dance hall music" and the movements as a one.

While all Rastas are homophobic, there are very few preaching violence as a tool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.80.101 (talk) 19:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Time for some clean-up

Okay guys, just a heads-up, but since this article is in need of some serious help, I'm going to do my best to make it more coherent and relevant ASAP. Let me know if I screw up! Cheers, Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 14:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. You can check my progress here. Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 17:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thinking the loooong list of individual incidents needs some serious clean up and could probably be split into its own article, perhaps titled Notable acts of violence against LGBT people or something similar. I've started it down that path in a sandbox-y page here if anyone wants to see/has any input? Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 02:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks like good edits to the main page, and the sandbox page looks good as well. Not sure on the choice of the term "notable," but it's good enough for now. I'd support moving it to mainspace, and linking from this article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 20:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you! I agree about "notable", but I couldn't think of a better term. Maybe once the page is created, someone with a larger vocabulary than I will come up with something better. Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 13:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

A thought occurs: perhaps "significant"? ...ah, someone else will probably think of something more appropriate. Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 15:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

ARTICLE SPLIT

As per the above discussion, this article has been split into three new articles: Significant acts of violence against LGBT people, for listing individual acts of violence, History of violence against LGBT people in the United Kingdom, because someone had done some lovely research and work on the UK's section in this article, and History of violence against LGBT people in the United States, because the US's section was insanely long. I think that covers it. Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 16:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

By Country

Don't know whether there is a census for this or anything, but shouldn't a list of the violence against the LGBT community be shown by country so activists in said countries can keep tabs and work to have it stopped?Lightningbarer (talk) 22:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

See Significant acts of violence against LGBT people. It's broken down by country. :) Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 00:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposals?

Since there have been some merges proposed on the article (namely merging gay bashing and homocaust into this article), let's discuss them, shall we? I agree Homocaust should probably be merged here, since the article is super-short/doesn't seem to need its own page. Maybe it will someday (hopefully not), but not now. As for Gay Bashing, I'll use the same reasons for opposing that merge as I did the last time a merge between them was suggested: "Oppose per user:Penbat ("Oppose. Violence specifically relates to physical abuse. Gay bullying and gay bashing relate to both physical and verbal abuse.") and the fact that the Violence against LGBT people article is already huge [...] I don't believe they should be merged with such a huge article that refers specifically to only one aspect of bullying." Noted 7 ^{(t · c)} 16:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I have no preference, I simply noted that this article has much more and better organized material than the dilapidated Homocaust and gay-bashing articles. Perhaps the best approach would be to {{split}} some of the material off to these article. But "homocaust" ("homocausto") seems to be just a humorous term for homophobic murders in Brazil, and it may be better to discuss these under a more encyclopedic terms such as "homophobic murders in Brazil".

In my dictionary (but your mileage may vary), "gay-bashing" is explicitly physical violence, while "gay bullying" may of course involve simple verbal injury or mobbing. So I am not sure it makes sense the article treats the two expressions as synonyms. I realize that "bashing" may be used figuratively, but when I hear "gay-bashing" I picture drunken hetero bullies chasing gays with clubs. etymonline has this to say: bash: "to strike violently," figurative sense of "abuse verbally or in writing" is from 1948. --dab (𒁳) 17:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

alright, googling around, I recognize that "gay bashing" is in fact widely used in the weaker (figurative) sense of "expressing anti-gay sentiments". So I agree it certainly makes sense to keep this separate from an article about physical assault. --dab (𒁳) 17:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

US-Centric

This article's section on Christianity and Homosexuality is even more US-centric than the full article Christianity and homosexuality. For example, despite the fact that that article clearly states that homosexuality is not viewed as immoral by all mainstream German Protestant groups with a combined membership of 24.5 million out of the country's 83 million population, this article blithely states that "most" Christian denominations view homosexuality in a certain way and then lists a bunch of United States denominations like the Reformed Church in America, which has 170,000 members. This article needs to take into account views across the world or it risks creating the impression that acceptance of homosexuality is limited to a few fringe groups. 124.170.38.173 (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Transgenders are not homosexuals

The lead of the article is written rather badly. While transgender people MAY be homosexuals they are not necessarily homosexuals. Gender identity and sexual identity are two completely different and separate things. Lumping LGBT as a 'homosexual community' is not only incorrect but also offensively ignorant.

"Discrimination against homosexuals is also referred to as discrimination against LGBTQI people. With LGBT(Q)I standing for ("lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, (questioning) and intersex")."

If this line must be included then perhaps it should mention that referring to LGBTQI as "discrimination against homosexuals" is inaccurate. Celynn (talk) 05:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorted (the first paragraph anyway). Thanks for pointing it out. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Article title?

Can someone clarify the history of the article title? The "Discrimination" sidebar shows the link "LGBT hate crime" which links to this article. Also, gay bashing is a distinct article. This article begins with the "Violence against LGBT people may occur either via legislation prohibiting homosexual acts, or by ad hoc intimidation, ..." which doesnt seem quite right, since discriminatory legislation is not encompassed in the typical definitions of "violence". The questions that jump out at me are:

1. Should this article be renamed to "LGBT hate crime" to be consistent with the Discrimination sidebar? Or should the sidebar be changed to be consistent with this article title?
2. If the article title is left as-is ("Violence against ...") should the article include discriminatory legislation?
3. If the article is to keep the current "Violence ..." title and to include discriminatory legislation, what is the source that justifies that?
4. If this article is going to focus on violence, should gay bashing be merged into this article (I presume that gay bashing accounts for the vast majority of violence against LGBTs, true?)
5. Does the term "gay bashing" exclude violence against transsexuals (I see that Trans bashing is a distinct article)?
6. Could this article be considered a subarticle of homophobia? Or does homophobia exclude transexuals (its text does say it includes persons "perceived to be homosexual", but I note the existence of Transphobia)?

I ask because I was thinking of working on gay bashing article (bring it up to GA or perhaps even FA status), but I don't want to invest the time if there is no clear agreement about terminology and article scopes. Thanks in advance for any replies. --Noleander (talk) 10:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

as with the previous thread, thanks for pointing out *another* problem with this article! yes, I think that titling, intro wording and content weight all need looking at. Any suggestions are welcome, and I have an idea or two of my own. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 11:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Could you provide your thoughts on the specific questions listed above: I want to get a feel for how others perceive the overlap between the articles. --Noleander (talk) 11:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I feel that the two articles are redundant and that they should be merged and re-titled, that discriminatory legislation should be mentioned if we have reliable sources that discuss it as an example of violence but not discussed extensively (do we have an article on homosexuality bans that we could mainlink to?) and that anti-trans hate crimes should also be mentioned (since "LGBT" is standard title format) but mainlinked to the article that I assume exists on anti-trans hate crime. And yes, sub-article of homophobia. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Were gays ever lynched?

I've noticed this article mentions ancient persecution and modern persecution but doesn't really say anything about this? Poppurrpop (talk) 19:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Lynched is a somewhat ambiguous and loaded word, are you asking if there was persecution in the US 19th & early 20th century, associated with the KKK and so forth? Or is the question more general, or... ? --joe decker^{talk to me} 19:54, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Tesco Vee of the Meatmen

An article I wrote for Metro Times is referenced here. I do think whoever wrote the summary was perhaps too impassioned and wound up unfairly characterizing the reporting. It says I "made the claim that, despite it's advocacy of gay-panic, or the Meatmen's own history of openly promoting anti-gay violence, the song was just the result of a 'misunderstanding.'[46] He states that lead singer Tesco Vee claims said misunderstanding occurred because the band booked itself in a gay man's bar, and reacted negatively to its patrons.[47]"

First of all, I didn't make any "claim". (Such freighted language makes the article a bit less objective-sounding.) I did what any reporter does: Interviews the subject and writes an article expressing what the interview uncovered. To impute motives to a writer is a mistake and a misstep.

Second, it says that I made a claim -- then inserts "despite it's [sic] advocacy of gay-panic" and "the Meatmen's own history of openly promoting anti-gay violence" -- and then finishes my claim. A reasonable reader who doesn't follow the link and learn what the article says would presume that these inserted points were part of the original article and therefore something the writer (a) knows and (b) believes, again imputing motives to my writing that simply are not there.

Third, it quotes "misunderstanding" as if the word appears in the article. The word does NOT appear in the article, again calling into question the motives and rigor of the person who added this information.

Fourth, it gives the impression that one time, one place, the Meatmen were booked in a gay bar. As any reasonable person reading the original article would conclude, "Punk bands playing gay nightclubs. Such music venues as Bookie's and Nunzio's were strictly gay bars most of the time. 'But on weekends,' Tesco says, 'they'd have a punk show. And that's what prompted "Tooling for Anus." You know, some of the regulars would hang out and, um, it was a "worlds-collide" kind of thing.'" As you can see, the Meatmen and other Detroit punk bands played "punk nights" at gay bars, and regular patrons would sometimes attend as well. This was a well-documented phenomenon, as scanning through old fliers proves that punk and rock bands did play at such venues as Nunzio's (http://www.motorcityrock.com/venues/nunzios/nunzios.html) during that time period. As for Vee and company reacting negatively to patrons, where in the article does it say that?

This whole section seems to be written by somebody aching to take down Tesco Vee -- along with anybody who'd dare write a pretty neutral article about him. Please be fair. Please alter the text to reflect the reality of the article, and don't impute any motives to me that I don't have. Michael M. Jackman (talk) 18:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

You can do that yourself. You just have to click on "edit" and fix what is wrong. BE BOLD--В и к и T 18:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Updated Hate Crime stats

Here's the link to the 2010 hate crime stats: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.233.206 (talk) 16:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Historical state-Sanctioned violence; Only in Europe?

I have a funny feeling there was probably at some point state-sanctioned violence against LGBT people somewhere outside of Europe. I will look into this further, but it might be a bit of a task... any help would be appreciated. Cheers! ☻☻☻Sithman VIII !!☻☻☻ 04:10, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Original research: Macho culture and social homophobia

"From an evolutionary point of view male-to-male homophobia makes little sense, as the existence of homosexual males in the population reduces for any heterosexual male the number of competitors in the heterosexual mating process. If anything, from the same point of view hetero males would be expected to encourage homosexual preferences in other males."—Source

Although plausible, this claim isn't referenced and looks like original research.—109.231.234.46 (talk) 11:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Missing reference

^ a b c d e f g h i j k Stahnke, Tad, et. al. (2008). Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Bias: 2008 Hate Crime Survey. Human Rights First.

This pdf currently 404's, not sure if it has been moved or has just disappeared completely. --91.209.142.224 (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Eggs

Does throwing eggs actually count as violence? Can kids get criminalised for throwing eggs at each other, or at houses on halloween?

SuperMudz (talk) 07:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, of course it's violent, and a criminal offense. Your second question doesn't make any sense. If you mean, "can they be arrested and charged?", of course, they can. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

SuperMudz it depends on the context and the relationship. In some contexts throwing eggs may be considered playful high jinks but in other contexts it can constitute a belittling hate attack linked with a potentially wilful damaging of property. How do you think it would affect (I don't know if I have terminologies right) someone, say, with a princess mentality. GregKaye 19:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of serial killers

The inclusion of the serial killers John Wayne Gacy and Jeffrey Dahmer is problematic. It's not clear that self-hate was the only (or driving) reason behind their crimes. Recommend either deletion or move to separate section. omgwtf

Commenting to add date for bot archiving EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:06, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

State-sponsored violence

The article says that "The Roman Empire starting under Constantine around 400 CE." Since Constantine was emperor between 306 and 337, I think "The Roman Empire starting under Constantine in the early 4th century", or maybe "The Roman Empire starting after Constantine around 400 CE." would be more appropriate.

Commenting to add date for bot archiving EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:06, 6 December 2015 (UTC)