It’s like a tag-team. As soon as one tires, they tag a new one to come along and start with the same misconception already covered multiple times in the same thread. It’s fruitless. Anyone with the ears to hear has already gotten the point back on page one. Yet here we are with the same arguement, already refuted, after several pages as if all that has gone before was not there.
OK, I think Cecil needs to weigh in on this issue.
I guess this is a little late and off the topic now…but…
Eddie Araujo was simply at a house party dressed as a woman…one of the murders’ girlfriends found out about this and made it announced that “he” was a “she”…there was no sex involved in this at all.
and another tidbit of fun-ness I guess…
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Brown warned Araujo to leave. When Araujo tried to flee, she was stopped in the front yard by the three other suspects, Michael Magidson, Jason Cazares and Jaron Nabors, and forced back inside. (The party took place at Merel’s house.)
Inside the house, Brown testified, Araujo was thrown against the wall, punched and strangled. Brown, who said she was “in shock,” woke up her boyfriend, Paul Merel, and they left the house. Brown, who said she’d smoked marijuana and consumed 10 beers that night, did not call police after leaving the party.
Welcome kabukiboy. It is customary in GD to post a link to any newspaper articles cited in the thread but thanks for the info. if the facts are as you describe them then this is even more definitely a hate crime.
Since there seems to be questions over the details, I went and looked up as much information about this case as I could find. Apparently the murder was premeditated.
Here are some articles that go into detail about this case.
http://www.planetout.com/pno/news/roundups/package.html?sernum=461
http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1865~1203256,00.html
http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=7796&sd=02/21/03
http://www.ktvu.com/news/2004463/detail.html
http://www.benicianews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=28937&webpage=0&s=1
There is a memorial fund:
In cases where there are multiple defendants, the police and DA often have to cut a deal with someone. Nabors led them to the body and is testifying against the others in court. It may not be an ideal system, but often it’s the only way to get convictions.
For the record, my argumentation above was not suggesting that the accused should not have been startled or shocked at finding what they had taken to be a “girl” to have a penis; it was attempting to exculpate Eddie/Gwen from any accusation of “deception.”
Stinkpalm, I can grant that 99% of people are easily categorizable by your handy-dandy structure – although the point that a eunuch is no less a man was a valid one. And I would hazard a guess that no hermaphrodite is happy as a “switch hitter” – IMHO, they identify as a boy/man or a girl/woman and live out that particular life despite having intersexed genitalia.
But let us note that people with gender dysphoria are precisely what you meant by “take it on a case-by-case basis.” What makes me a man and not a woman, in my own sense, is not merely that I have to shave regularly, have XY chromosomes, a penis and testicles, and an occipital condyle – it’s that I know myself to be a man, inside. If a hypothetical mad scientist should seize me and force me through gender reassignment surgery, a course of hormonal therapy, and inject me with a designer virus carrying a retrogene that consumes my Y chromosome and causes my X chromosome to reproduce, I would still feel myself to be a man, inside, after all that, despite having every evidence of being a woman. And I suspect you would feel the same.
People with gender dysphoria “know” that they are “really women” despite the evidence that would convince you or me that they are male, or “really men” despite evidence that they are female. And they proceed to live out the role that matches what they “know themselves to be,” including getting rid of the inconvenient physical evidence to the contrary.
And they’re the ones that need to be dealt with on a case by case basis.
Eddie/Gwen was foolish to engage in casual sex without acquainting the people she wanted to have sex with that she was “a girl in a boy’s body” (her perception) – but she was neither homosexual (she did not want to be a man having sex with other men) nor deceptive (she was not “really a man pretending to be a woman” in her own mind).
I’m standing on my scanner applauding. Is there an acronym for that?
It’s still murder and I think all the men should die, but I’m opposed to any kind of hate laws. This thread isn’t about whether or not that was a hate crime. It’s a forum for paranoid homosexuals to work themselves into a self-righteous tizzy fit over how oppressed they are, and how no man should be at all upset at being fooled by a transvestite. A good guideline would be not to let any woman blow you who is so ugly that she might be a man wearing make-up and a skirt.
Moth, not only am I not paranoid, I’m also strictly heterosexual, and it’s obvious on its face that this is a hate crime.
The only one in a tizzy is you.
You mean women as ugly as Caroline Cossey?
You mean women as ugly as [url=“http://tgmedia.enacre.net/lorna_lynne/tula.html”]Caroline Cossey?
(fixed link)
(third time lucky)
“A good guideline would be not to let any woman blow you who is so ugly that she might be a man wearing make-up and a skirt.”
—As this is not the Pit, I am not allowed to say the extremely unladylike things I am thinking about Mr. Chunks. So I request that you all think of the worst possible things I might possibly have said, if this were the Pit, and apply them.
I have tried several times to ask simple questions of him and Hermann, but they have both declined to answer, preferring to fall back on what I might term less-than-incisive posts. I give up—their opinions matter little to me, but I thought I might engage them in an interesting dialogue. Seems not. Ah, well.
Actually, much of the discussion on this thread has been precisely about whether or not it was a hate crime. This aspect of the discussion has had two distinct versions: on the one hand, some argued over the general issue of hate crime legislation, whether or not it was a good idea, and whether this case should be called a hate crime; on the other hand some addressed whether it should be prosecuted as a hate crime under the current California statute. Both strands of the conversation were very much about whether this was a hate crime, your unsubstantiated assertion notwithstanding.
I’m not sure what information you have about other Dopers that i don’t, but unless a person tells me outright about his or her sexuality (like Cervaise did in a recent post), i prefer not to make assumptions. Despite the fact that i’ve been arguing the opposite side of the debate to you over the past few pages, i still consider myself a heterosexual man. I know it might be hard for some people to believe this, but you don’t have to be gay/lesbian/bi/trans in order to oppose discrimination based on sexuality.
As far as i can see after going back over the whole thread, no-one has suggested that “no man should be at all upset at being fooled by a transvestite.” In one of my posts, i made it quite clear that i would be rather angry if this happened. But the point people have been trying to make is that being upset about it can’t undo the fact that it’s happened, and in no way justifies beating someone to death. And some of us have also made the point that if you do beat someone to death after something like this, then it probably indicates a level of hatred that transcends simple anger at deception - thus the hate crime charge.
Also, as Polycarp made clear is a recent post, the whole terminology of “homosexuality” and “deception” being used on this thread by some people is rather ill-informed.
And finally, on a different matter, i have yet to see Hermann either justify or retract his allegation that it was Araujo who was guilty of rape in this case. This allegation was made despite the fact that, even if we leave all sexuality/gender issues out of the debate, Araujo was 17 at the time of the attack and thus not legally able to consent to sexual relations; those who had sex with Araujo were 22 and 23, and thus committed statutory rape.
{QUOTE]It’s still murder and I think all the men should die, but I’m opposed to any kind of hate laws. This thread isn’t about whether or not that was a hate crime. It’s a forum for paranoid homosexuals to work themselves into a self-righteous tizzy fit over how oppressed they are,…
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely no one has implied that, especially since all the “homosexuals” that posted denied that the victim was one, and that it had anything to do with homosexuals at all.
Let’s review: According to the accounts we’ve seen in the thread so far, there were four attackers and one victim. The victim was bound and helpless. While tied up, the victim was kicked, punched, strangled, pummeled with a soup can, beaten with an iron skillet, and hit with shovels. Some of these implements were not close at hand, they had to be gotten from another room, or from outside the house. The victim was most likely still beaten while dead, and a rope tied tightly around her neck to drag the body away. The victim was a transgendered youth, and this was known to the attackers.
And you’re asking if this was a hate crime? Why is this even a question? If this was a black man who had been attacked by four white men this brutally, would you be asking the same question? Is there any justification for this sort of brutailty? Is there any reason for it other than unbridled hatred?
To those who are playing “Blame the Victim” in this case, suggesting that the victim’s behavior led to this sort of reaction in any reasonable scenario, I ask this: What reason, other than hatred, did the attackers have to commit this crime, in this way? And another one, What standards would you apply to a hate crime that this case does not fall under?
To me, this case practically defines what a hate crime is all about. Its brutality and the nature of the victim make it crystal clear.
Not to be nitpicky but, the victim was probably tied up after death. They hit her hard enough to indent the wall behind her head. They then dragged her to the garage and, while still conscious, put a rope around her neck and strangled her. The cause of death was strangulation. After her death, they still hit her with shovels, trying to make sure she was dead. Afterwards, one of them said “I could kick her a few more times”.
If I had my bulletproof installed, I would upload pictures of some very passable TS so you can see how beautiful some of them are.
http://bakla.net/ Warning: The last picture is a nude picture.
And for Lamia: http://annierichards.coolfreepage.com/gallery-tula.htm
Which I suspect is part of the problem.
Most people use the term “homosexual” to refer to genetic and physiological males who have sex with other genetic and physiological males. Which is what Araujo did. Therefore, this is classed as a “hate crime”, because Araujo was “homosexual” under the common definition, and therefore a member of a protected class, and given the special protection of hate crime legislation.
I think it is counter-productive to try to change the definitions out from under other people, and then cop an attitude when other people don’t automatically kow tow to the sacred cow. There is no objective way to determine gender, while establishing sex is usually trivial (even the thugs in this case who murdered Araujo were able to figure it out).
So how do we determine gender? Most would reply that we should leave it up to the individual, and emply neither coercion nor deception to try to change someone else’s gender.
Which is where Araujo went wrong. S/he used deception to influence others to change their self-defined ‘gender’, which was ‘genetic and physiological males who never have sex with other genetic and physiological males’.
You want to get all snippy when people decline to use ‘she’ in talking about transgendered people, go ahead. But you might want to consider being equally snippy when transgendered people show even greater disrepect for others in their gender choices.
I don’t believe it justifies murdering them. I also don’t believe it makes any difference to say so. My experience is that some of our more excitable Dopers will go ahead and accuse you of saying exactly the opposite, no matter what you do.
Regards,
Shodan
A nice site for pictures is always the TS Women’s Successes, for accounts of successful transitions:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TSsuccesses/TSsuccesses.html#anchor130618