Good times turn bad

[FurPus63]

Hi everyone,
Haven't posted in awhile. Just wanted to share my experience and get some feedback from you all on this topic. I'm sure it's been mentioned before. Even though I have been having a wonderful time "out and about" as Paulette, new wig and assessories to make her look super cool (pictures upcoming); it still hasn't been all perfect.

First of all I had a scary encounter with a man that got me thinking about how vulnerable we CD/TG girls are. It doesn't help that I learned from a lecture by a local attorney that the "Hate Crime" laws don't apply to TG people in my state (Michigan) so all that would ever happen if someone(s) ever attacked me is they'd get an assault and battery charge towards a man (maybe a few months in jail and probation) vs the stiffer penalties and that really pisses me off! This world is so against us it's incredible!

Also; this incident made me think about those GG's who sometimes get accussted by idiots who think they're cool. What a scary situation for them it must be. I'm also thinking about all the sexual thoughts I've had as a man looking at a pretty woman or someone I'm attracted to. If those thoughts were ever manifested into words, I wouldn't be any better than the asshole who didn't have enough sense to keep his thoughts to himself.

Feedback???

Paulette

[linda allen]

I've never understood the concept of "hate crimes". If someone beats you or kills you, what does it matter why? Why is it considered a worse crime for a white person to kill a black person than for a black person to kill a black person? They are just as dead.

I can only figure they are "feel good" laws passed to appease a special interest group.

As far as bad experiences as Paulette, think of yourself as a woman. There are places women don't go alone or at certain times of day because bad things might happen to them. There are things that women don't do or say for the same reason.

Being in public as a woman gives you a new perspective on life. That's probably a good thing.

[Beth Mays]

Being in public as a woman gives you a new perspective on life. That's probably a good thing.

This IS one of the most positive things others never think of when we CD. We see and really understand the things other people face everyday. I can make us better people when we apply what we learn.






Beth

[BLUE ORCHID]

Hi Paulette, It's a crazy world out there things like that can happen when you least expect it.
Just try not to put yourself in a bad position.

[jillleanne]

Hence the reason I continue to remind people about dressing appropriately for the occasion, right or wrong.

[moondog]

Yeah, some guys are idiots. I took karate classes in my twenties and have been thinking about joining an akido class. Mostly to help my get back in shape, but the self defense part doesn't hurt. I remember seeing a video of two professional kickboxers who were going to a drag ball fundraiser and were threatened and then attacked by several drunk idiots. It didn't turn out so well for the drunk idiots.

[Vickie_CDTV]

I've never understood the concept of "hate crimes". If someone beats you or kills you, what does it matter why? Why is it considered a worse crime for a white person to kill a black person than for a black person to kill a black person? They are just as dead.

I never understood it either. The stiffest penalties should always apply in every case regardless of motivation.

[kimdl93]

There's a big difference between using your inner voice and your outer voice. We all see attractive people, but most of us are considerate enough to keep whatever thoughts we have to ourselves.

Those who physically impose themselves - to any degree - on another person are, crude and vile individuals.

[Dawn cd]

To Linda and Vickie re hate crimes: If a person assaults you for something you DO, that's one thing. But if a person assaults you for someone you ARE, that's a hate crime and a very different issue. Because if you or I can be attacked for who we are, the very fabric of a free society is threatened, and no one is safe.

[linda allen]

To Linda and Vickie re hate crimes: If a person assaults you for something you DO, that's one thing. But if a person assaults you for someone you ARE, that's a hate crime and a very different issue. Because if you or I can be attacked for who we are, the very fabric of a free society is threatened, and no one is safe.
But you've still been attacked and you are still hurt or dead. Nobody attacks you because they like you.

I don't see it as being a different issue. In truth, no one is all that safe anyway.

[docrobbysherry]

Paulette, NEVER beat yourself up for your thots! EVERYONE has sick, perverted, inappropriate, and/or weird ideas going thru their minds. If they didn't, how long do u think organised religion would last?

It's just that civilized folks DON'T ACT on those thots! The trolls and primitives that DO, don't belong out in public. That's why jails were invented!

[Karren H]

EVERYONE has sick, perverted, inappropriate, and/or weird ideas going thru their minds. !

Don't assume that just because you do, everyone does! Lol

[Meg East]

Men who beat up women, gays and cd's are cowards at best. Bullies are always phobic of something and too afraid to confront their inners demons.

[suchacutie]

I think that one of the very strong positive outcomes of discovering that I am transgendered is the incredible discussions about what it's like to grow up in each gender. Once I understood that Tina existed, it was clear that she had to know all she could about being a woman. As my wife and I discussed one topic after another, she became curious about growing up as a boy. We have shared so much that never would have surfaced in any other way, and Tina's insight about what it's like to be a woman has changed so much about how I live my (our) life (lives).

It makes me wonder if CDing will eventually become a sought-after commodity in potential mates for GGs. Wouldn't that be a kick! :)

[Cheryl T]

Those people are the reason that my wife "insists" (most of the time) in going out with me.
I asked what she would be doing if someone accosted me because of my dressing. In her words, "At least I'll be able to call 911".
I laughed and said, "Gee thanks". It was really funny because as I told her (up until 6 months ago when she finally got a cell phone) "Won't help me much if the phone is in my purse".

She hadn't thought about that....lol. Good intentions though.

[Persephone]

To Linda and Vickie re hate crimes: If a person assaults you for something you DO, that's one thing. But if a person assaults you for someone you ARE, that's a hate crime and a very different issue. Because if you or I can be attacked for who we are, the very fabric of a free society is threatened, and no one is safe.

I'm with Linda and Vickie. From my perspective "hate crime" is just a way for government and "LGBT political activists" to use and manipulate people.

If "hate crime" was really about who you "are," then why would it have selective definitions? Why could lesbians and gays, but not the transgendered be "covered" by hate crime legislation one week and then transgendered would suddenly be "covered" when the legislation is modified the following week?

Tell me, if such laws exist to especially protect people who are victimized because of who they "are," then how come such laws do not apply to all women? After all, women are far more often the victims of rape, beatings, kidnappings, being held in basements and repeatedly raped, etc. Far, far more often than "members of the LGBT community," yet they aren't covered by "hate crime" legislation?

Doesn't that seem stangely selective and at odds with the basic premise of "hate crime"?

Persephone.

[Dawn cd]

Altho this discussion is off the main thread, it's an interesting one. Persephone, "hate" crimes are so ugly because the victim is usually innocent of any act that brought retaliation. They are attacked simply for who they are—their very existence triggers fury in some sick perpetrator. If society turns a blind eye on this, no one is safe. (Of course none of us are absolutely safe anyway, but the law rightly places a high value on our freedom to be who we want to be.) You're right that legislatures are continually enlarging the notion of hate crimes, and perhaps they still haven't enlarged it sufficiently, but it seems clear to me that hate adds another dimension to crimes that are otherwise committed out of vengeance or greed.

[JamieG]

Also; this incident made me think about those GG's who sometimes get accussted by idiots who think they're cool. What a scary situation for them it must be. I'm also thinking about all the sexual thoughts I've had as a man looking at a pretty woman or someone I'm attracted to. If those thoughts were ever manifested into words, I wouldn't be any better than the asshole who didn't have enough sense to keep his thoughts to himself.


This reminds of the first time I left the house in drag. My wife and I went to a friend's party as Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera (I was Xtina). My wife drove (since I had no experience driving in heels). When we were stopped at a stoplight, a car full of neanderthals pulled up next to us (on my side) and they immediately started to make lewd remarks towards us (so loud we could hear them with our windows rolled up). I have never felt so vulnerable as I did that night. It gave me new respect for the troubles women go through, who have to put up with that SH*T just because they felt like putting on striking makeup or wearing a short skirt. Neither one of was even showing much skin. Now it is possible that I was read, and that's what triggered them; but I'm not sure. My friend thought we were two random girls crashing his party until I was right in front him.

[Marie-Elise]

I've never understood the concept of "hate crimes". If someone beats you or kills you, what does it matter why? Why is it considered a worse crime for a white person to kill a black person than for a black person to kill a black person? They are just as dead.

I can see where you're coming from but I am afraid I have to disagree.

Crimes committed where the primary motivation is gender, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation are justifiably categorized as hate crimes. These crimes are committed against a particular group of people identified as "other" by a more dominant group. This is the kind of motivation that resulted in the Nazi death camps, the genocide in Rwanda and various other violent occurrences throughout history.

The "why" may not matter to the deceased, it never does. But to the larger society, it very much matters. To the groups targeted, it matters even more.

I just have to add that it is very natural, being part of the dominant culture in any aspect, to have the perspective that everyone faces the same environment as we do. However, it's not so. I don't know that hate laws are not enacted to placate minority groups. I think they are enacted (in the US anyway) to help us live up to the "all men are created equal" part of the constitution. In fact, these laws have in one way or another been debated and enacted in just about every period of US history.

It would be interesting to get the opinion of someone from one of the minority groups anywhere.

[paulaprimo]

i haven't been out yet, and as a former hockey player, being able to fight on skates, for a couple or 40 years, i should be okay on 5" heels and i pity the idiot that gives me crap cause it will be his worst nigthmare come true...getting his ass kicked in public by a chic in a dress and heels!! :devil: so much for me not trying to not draw attention to myself...lol:eek:

[JessHaust]

I've never been afraid of being out and getting hurt by some jerk. I'm still the same guy underneath, and armed, ever been hit in the face with a 4" spiked heel?

[RenneB]

Okay so now think what it would be like to be a very hot GG. Everywhere you go people stop and stare. Some will point and others will follow you to take a picture. When you meat someone, they say "oh how beautiful you are", of which you had nothing to do with being beautiful as you were born that way and are just out for a walk.

You walk into a restaruant and everyone at the tabels stop what they're doing, in mid bite even, and glace you up and down. The guys check you out as a mating ritual, while the GGs check you out to find a flaw or to determine 'who' you're wearing.

I know this 'cus I dated a model back in my younger days. She was the perfect 10, with long blonde hair and a perfect figure. We went out for lunch and that was exactly what happened. I asked her if she noticed. She said, "oh yea, but it gets old after a while, and I don't pay any attention to them anymore." We never carried the dates any further and we parted ways, but it gives me some reflection on the human condition.

If you are a really hot GG, most people are going to stop, stare and some might even chase you. Young males will come up to you all the time and ask for your number or ask you out for a date. For those hot GGs that know better, they prefer to go out with others and not be alone.

I'm going to say it's the same for CDrs.....well kindof. If you pass really well and are lookin like Ana Tra**y, you are going to get hit upon by practically everyone. If you don't pass as well, then number of people that are going to point and look are going to probably be a little less. But when you do come across a human that 'wants you', you'd be better off in numbers.

Not sure if this makes any scense Paulette but I thought I'd just share some of my thoughts.....

Renne.....

[Alice Torn]

All violent crime is hate crime. I have been harrassed and jeered at because i was white. Hate knows no colors or gender. Malicious crime is malicsious crime. I agree, that any attractive gg or cd, will get lots of unwanted attention.

[Leslie Langford]

Some very valid points are being raised here, and ones that I can readily identify with myself.

Not long after I started going out regularly en femme, I noticed an odd phenomenon taking hold. Despite being on the taller and heavier side as GG's go (5' 10", 170lbs.), I invariably began to feel more vulnerable and exposed when out alone at night - even in "safe" and well-travelled parts of town. No real reason, no actual or perceived threats, no being "hit on"- just the same kind of sense of unease and apprehension that seems to strike GG's in similar circumstances. And yet, when in male mode, I normally never think twice about doing the same thing or going to the same places by myself. It's almost as if a subconscious self-preservation instinct kicks in when the "Leslie" side of my personality takes over...:eek:

[Helen_Highwater]

I don't want to get into a dispute here but "Hate crimes" in my opinion, is a valid expression. Yes dead is dead, but being dead just because of the way you are, and in our case CD/TV/TG is as deplorable as killing someone for the colour of their skin. When you read so many of the threads on this site it is so apparent that being CD isnt' a simple life style choice. It goes far deeper than that.
Labeling something as a Hate Crime focuses the law enforcers to recognize that, if you and I are stopped while driving in our cars, or walking down the street, or being in a restaurant, we're not doing something that is inherently wrong. We have the same protection as any body else and that they, the law enforcers, have a DUTY to recognize that fact.
Attacking someone just because of the skin they're in is something that should have passed it's "Sell by date". Society has moved thankfull, on, albeit as yet not far enough. I am what I am. I don't want to live in fear for being the person that I am. Unfortunately there are still too many morons out there but that is not a reason to let the bast**ds win! All I need now is the courage of my convictions to get out there enfem (and the full support of the law!).

[Helen_Highwater]

I don't want to get into a dispute here but "Hate crimes" in my opinion, is a valid expression. Yes dead is dead, but being dead just because of the way you are, and in our case CD/TV/TG is as deplorable as killing someone for the colour of their skin. When you read so many of the threads on this site it is so apparent that being CD isnt' a simple life style choice, a fashion statement. It goes far far deeper than that.
Labeling something as a Hate Crime focuses the law enforcers to recognize that, if dressed you or I are stopped while driving in our cars, or walking down the street, or being in a restaurant, we're not doing something that is inherently wrong. We have the same protection as any body else and that they, the law enforcers, have a DUTY to recognize that fact and to offer the same protection to us as to any other citizen.
Attacking someone just because of the skin they're in is something that should have passed it's "Sell by date". Society has moved thankfully, on, albeit as yet not far enough. I am what I am. I don't want to live in fear for being the person that I am. Unfortunately there are still too many morons out there; but that is not a reason to let the bast**ds win! All I need now is the courage of my convictions to get out there enfem (and backed by the full support of the law!).

[docrobbysherry]

Don't assume that just because you do, everyone does! Lol
I stand corrected! Thank u Karren! I should never say "never"! Or, "everyone"!

So, EVERYONE except Karren and a FEW other unnamed folks have inappropriate thots! (Is that BETTER!?)

[girlygirly]

Nobody attacks you because they like you.
They will, but you have to pay extra for that.

I have to agree about hate crimes. I wouldn't like it if someone received less time after beating me to a pulp, simply because I'm a heterosexual white male.

[Persephone]

Attacking someone just because of the skin they're in is something that should have passed it's "Sell by date".

So let's see if I understand . . . Attacking someone because of their skin color or their gender identity is definitely wrong, but singling them out and keeping them socially distinct and different so that you can offer them unique and special "protection" is O.K.? Both are forms of discrimination.

Once upon a time I was instrumental in the hiring of a young woman for a rather good job in our department. One day she came to me and said, "I have to ask you a question that I need you to answer honestly because otherwise it will bother me for the rest of my life. Was I hired because I was the best qualified applicant for the job? Or was I hired because I was a woman?"

I told her the truth, that she was hired because she was the best applicant.

"Preference," be it in hiring, or in special treatment under the law ("hate crime"), or in being singled out for a beating is just plain wrong.

Hugs,
Persephone.

[Chickhe]

Hate crime is not not just a crime against the victim, it is a whole minority group that is the target. The hate laws apply even if there is no assult... too bad your state is behind in the times.

I had a taste of being sought after the last party I went to ...still makes be shiver a bit. It was nothing bad, but the guy was a bit off... and he seemed smitten...my wife still teases me. Sure is a taste of what women have to deal with... there were a couple other instances when we were in the radar... can't say I've had any bad situations though...just no experience, so that makes me nervous. I'm always on gaurd, but in a way after having gone out a few times, my trust in people has gone up...almost always have a positive experience.

[IwishIwasTracy]

So if I kill you because it is some random act I should get a lighter sentence because I killed you because of who you are? Think about it from this prospective.

Court room one: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her son. He is convicted and given 50 years to life.
Court room two: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her gay son. He is convicted and give life without parole.

In which case was justice done? Why is the victim in court room one deserving of less justice than in court room two? I say in both cases life without parole. The reason for the killing doesn't matter what does matter is that the killing was done and the sentences should match. Hate crimes are liberals way of making themselves feel good about themselves. Think about the victims.

I am sure someone will think I am some dumb conservative that just doesn't understand because Rush Limbaugh has dulled my brain. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I value each persons life and refuse to accept that one is more precious than another's base on some made up social category.

Alright, off the soapbox.

Tracy

[DanaR]

If you watch women, usually you don't see them walking around at night by themselves. If you do, there is probably a group of them. So if you are out by yourself, walking around, you'll be attracting attention.

Let fear be you guide.

[ReineD]

First of all I had a scary encounter with a man that got me thinking about how vulnerable we CD/TG girls are.

...

Feedback???

As a GG, I don't place myself in situations where I chance to have a nasty encounter with a man. I foresee potentially dangerous situations and I make sure I'm protected. Last summer I left an establishment later than planned, which meant that I had to get to my car at a latish hour, in a parking lot that was dark and isolated. This is a college town and there were tons of college kids around on the main street. I approached 3 guys (I'm old enough to be their mom :)), explained my situation, and asked if they wouldn't mind walking me to my car. They understood and they were happy to do it. :)

This might not be a tactic that you can use, but you could park your car in visible places and you could stay away from bars or parts of town that you don't feel safe in, especially when you're dressed and you might attract violent homophobic reactions.

And now my question about something I've never understood. I know that you open yourself up to being beaten up for who you are by some homophobes, and I understand your fears about this. But, if you weren't dressed and you ran into an unsavory character you felt intended you harm, would you feel as scared? By this I mean, if you feel you can protect yourself in guy mode, how does this change when you're dressed, unless of course they outnumber you?

[vivianann]

I'm with Linda and Vickie. From my perspective "hate crime" is just a way for government and "LGBT political activists" to use and manipulate people.


I so agree


If "hate crime" was really about who you "are," then why would it have selective definitions? Why could lesbians and gays, but not the transgendered be "covered" by hate crime legislation one week and then transgendered would suddenly be "covered" when the legislation is modified the following week?

Tell me, if such laws exist to especially protect people who are victimized because of who they "are," then how come such laws do not apply to all women? After all, women are far more often the victims of rape, beatings, kidnappings, being held in basements and repeatedly raped, etc. Far, far more often than "members of the LGBT community," yet they aren't covered by "hate crime" legislation?



Doesn't that seem stangely selective and at odds with the basic premise of "hate crime"?

Persephone.


They will, but you have to pay extra for that.

I have to agree about hate crimes. I wouldn't like it if someone received less time after beating me to a pulp, simply because I'm a heterosexual white male.

Me neither

?

So let's see if I understand . . . Attacking someone because of their skin color or their gender identity is definitely wrong, but singling them out and keeping them socially distinct and different so that you can offer them unique and special "protection" is O.K.? Both are forms of discrimination.

That is so true, I have always believed special protections for certain groups is discrimination for those who not a part of the special groups.


Once upon a time I was instrumental in the hiring of a young woman for a rather good job in our department. One day she came to me and said, "I have to ask you a question that I need you to answer honestly because otherwise it will bother me for the rest of my life. Was I hired because I was the best qualified applicant for the job? Or was I hired because I was a woman?"

I told her the truth, that she was hired because she was the best applicant.

"Preference," be it in hiring, or in special treatment under the law ("hate crime"), or in being singled out for a beating is just plain wrong.

Hugs,

I believe it is wrong and very unfair too.


Persephone.


So if I kill you because it is some random act I should get a lighter sentence because I killed you because of who you are? Think about it from this prospective.

Court room one: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her son. He is convicted and given 50 years to life.
Court room two: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her gay son. He is convicted and give life without parole.

In which case was justice done? Why is the victim in court room one deserving of less justice than in court room two? I say in both cases life without parole. The reason for the killing doesn't matter what does matter is that the killing was done and the sentences should match. Hate crimes are liberals way of making themselves feel good about themselves. Think about the victims.

I am sure someone will think I am some dumb conservative that just doesn't understand because Rush Limbaugh has dulled my brain. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I value each persons life and refuse to accept that one is more precious than another's base on some made up social category.

I love your analogy you made comparing the the crimes and victims in court 1 and court 2. You said best, because when peaple are murdered it should not matter who the might be, justice is supposed to be blind, and as far as I am concerned if a person commits murder, and it can be proved that they committed the crime in a court of law (especially with dna evidence) they should get the death penalty. Because when you kill someone it is because you hate, no matter why.
Alright, off the soapbox.

Tracy


As a GG, I don't place myself in situations where I chance to have a nasty encounter with a man. I foresee potentially dangerous situations and I make sure I'm protected. Last summer I left an establishment later than planned, which meant that I had to get to my car at a latish hour, in a parking lot that was dark and isolated. This is a college town and there were tons of college kids around on the main street. I approached 3 guys (I'm old enough to be their mom :)), explained my situation, and asked if they wouldn't mind walking me to my car. They understood and they were happy to do it. :)

This might not be a tactic that you can use, but you could park your car in visible places and you could stay away from bars or parts of town that you don't feel safe in, especially when you're dressed and you might attract violent homophobic reactions.

I agree with Reine. 100% we need to be aware of our surroundings, and avoid dangerous places.


And now my question about something I've never understood. I know that you open yourself up to being beaten up for who you are by some homophobes, and I understand your fears about this. But, if you weren't dressed and you ran into an unsavory character you felt intended you harm, would you feel as scared? By this I mean, if you feel you can protect yourself in guy mode, how does this change when you're dressed, unless of course they outnumber you?

I never understand this way of thinking either. When I am dressed enfemme and out in public I am not scared at all, because I know how to protect myself, just because I am wearing a dress, it does not make me weaker, or unable to fight back. I was in a fight last summer when I was attacked by a man taller than I am, I was dressed enfemme that night when this altercation happened, the man who attacked me ended up in the hospital with a severe cuncussion, and smashed nuts. And this fight was caught on security video, he was charged with assault and battery, and his girlfriend was charged with assault when she tried to tear my dress off of my body at a dance club. I dont need any special laws to protect me, all I need is my legs and fists to protect me.

[Marie-Elise]

So let's see if I understand . . . Attacking someone because of their skin color or their gender identity is definitely wrong, but singling them out and keeping them socially distinct and different so that you can offer them unique and special "protection" is O.K.? Both are forms of discrimination.

I guess the fact is that they are socially distinct, and not by their own choosing but by the dominant society's choosing. I mean, blacks didn't ask to be enslaved, shipped halfway around the world and then sold like cattle. Even the Constitution had a 3/5s amendment, determining that a black man is 3/5s of a man for population purposes in defining the number of representatives a state was entitled to. Then, after emancipation, there was willful discrimination, Jim Crow, separate but equal...I could go on.

Then they got "special discrimination" (lynching, etc.) so, yes, special protection is probably reasonable. I mean, an organization (KKK) was created to persecute them. Neo-Nazi groups continue the tradition against Jews and other non-white races today so, yes, I think special protection might be reasonable against their persecutors.

[linda allen]

.............., "hate" crimes are so ugly because the victim is usually innocent of any act that brought retaliation. .
In most cases, the victim is "innocent". You're walking down the street and someone pulls a gun and robs you. Or beats you so they can take your money. You're driving in your car and stopped at a stoplight and someone jumps in your car and pushes you out and steals the car. There are very few incidents where the victim asked to be the victim or even did something to deserve to be the victim of a crime.

[Marie-Elise]

So if I kill you because it is some random act I should get a lighter sentence because I killed you because of who you are? Think about it from this prospective.

Court room one: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her son. He is convicted and given 50 years to life.
Court room two: A mother is sitting through a trial for the person that murdered her gay son. He is convicted and give life without parole.

In which case was justice done? Why is the victim in court room one deserving of less justice than in court room two? I say in both cases life without parole. The reason for the killing doesn't matter what does matter is that the killing was done and the sentences should match. Hate crimes are liberals way of making themselves feel good about themselves. Think about the victims.

I am sure someone will think I am some dumb conservative that just doesn't understand because Rush Limbaugh has dulled my brain. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I value each persons life and refuse to accept that one is more precious than another's base on some made up social category.

Alright, off the soapbox.

Tracy

Ummm...hate crimes do not carry different or more heavy penalties than other crimes. A murder is prosecuted as a murder. The hate crime designation is for statistical purposes and used to measure the trends of the nation.

[linda allen]

Does anyone think "Hate Crime" laws do anything to stop this sort of crime? Can you picture a bunch of guys standing on the corner half drunk watching a gay man walk by and one says "let's go jump that (insert slang word for gay man)." and another says "No, we better not, that would qualify as a hate crime." ?

Hate crime laws allow the government to seek stiffer penalties in some cases, but that doesn't stop the crimes from happening in the first place. At best, it puts the offender out of society for a longer time.

Hate crime laws may do more to cause resentment of the protected group because of the impression that some people are considered more equal than others.

[linda allen]

I guess the fact is that they are socially distinct, and not by their own choosing but by the dominant society's choosing. I mean, blacks didn't ask to be enslaved, shipped halfway around the world and then sold like cattle. Even the Constitution had a 3/5s amendment, determining that a black man is 3/5s of a man for population purposes in defining the number of representatives a state was entitled to. Then, after emancipation, there was willful discrimination, Jim Crow, separate but equal...I could go on.

Then they got "special discrimination" (lynching, etc.) so, yes, special protection is probably reasonable. I mean, an organization (KKK) was created to persecute them. Neo-Nazi groups continue the tradition against Jews and other non-white races today so, yes, I think special protection might be reasonable against their persecutors.

But, hate crime laws do not provide "special protection". They only provide special prosecution and punishment for the offenders.

[Marie-Elise]

But, hate crime laws do not provide "special protection". They only provide special prosecution and punishment for the offenders.

It seems you would only worry about that if you were, or planned on being, such an offender. Otherwise, it doesn't affect you, does it?

[Leslie Langford]

...And now my question about something I've never understood. I know that you open yourself up to being beaten up for who you are by some homophobes, and I understand your fears about this. But, if you weren't dressed and you ran into an unsavory character you felt intended you harm, would you feel as scared? By this I mean, if you feel you can protect yourself in guy mode, how does this change when you're dressed, unless of course they outnumber you?

I think I addressed that last point in my above post, Reine - at least from my own perspective.

I don't quite know why - it's just a feeling of vulnerability that comes over me when out en femme in certain potential "at risk" situations. It probably comes down to the fact that as males, we're usually pretty "invisible" when out in public and not used to being checked out (unless, of course, your name happens to be Johnny Depp, Steven Tyler, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Colin Farrell, or the like - LOL!). However, when I'm out en femme, I'm keenly aware of the fact that someone might be looking me over whether they realize that I am a crossdresser or not, and it's simply the female image that I am presenting which triggers the typical male response to such sexual visual clues.

As a heterosexual genetic male, I fully realize how that side of my brain functions when stimulated by a pleasing visual image under similar circumstances - call it "inside information", if you will ;), so perhaps that just heightens my awareness of how exposed I might be to an unwanted advance when in female mode.

[Alice Torn]

Leslie, Good post. Yes, it is like being a deer, in the area of many hunters! You feel like a whole different being! It makes us feel extremely vulnerable at times, almost like wearing a target, or sign, that says "notice me."

[vivianann]

Ummm...hate crimes do not carry different or more heavy penalties than other crimes. A murder is prosecuted as a murder. The hate crime designation is for statistical purposes and used to measure the trends of the nation. .


You need to check your facts, hate crime laws do carry stiffer penalties.
Just because it is the law, it does not stop a criminal from commiting the offense.

[Marie-Elise]

You need to check your facts, hate crime laws do carry stiffer penalties.
Just because it is the law, it does not stop a criminal from commiting the offense.


My mistake. Yes, they do carry stiffer penalties.

But, again, if you have no intention of committing a hate crime, why does it matter to you? Help me understand.

[GBJoker]

linda allen: Agreed, 100%.

moondog: And of course, the famous story of the robbers trying to use guns to rob a Toy-For-Tots box that had three Marines there. The robbers slipped on the ice and broke their noses, shoulders, arms, fingers, ribs, and suffered concussions. Pretty slick ice, if you ask me.

dawn cd: Should there be hate crime laws for a man killing his ex-wife, or vice versa, then? They are violent against their victims because of what they are. What about nerds/bullies? See Dateline NBC for the former, Columbine and VT for latter.

Meg East: I disagree. I have noticed little phobias from "bullies" other than standard dying type stuff.

docrobbysherry: 5000 years and counting.

kimdl93: I have always said what I thought. Just to put a... Smile on their faces.

[donnalee]

All violent crime is hate crime. I have been harrassed and jeered at because i was white. Hate knows no colors or gender. Malicious crime is malicsious crime. I agree, that any attractive gg or cd, will get lots of unwanted attention.The simple truth is that a$$holes come in all colors, creeds, nationalities and sexes. Just because someone falls into one of those descriptions does not justify carte blanche because of it.


They will, but you have to pay extra for that.

I have to agree about hate crimes. I wouldn't like it if someone received less time after beating me to a pulp, simply because I'm a heterosexual white male.Nobody makes you the target of a criminal act because they like you (what you describe is more in the nature of a business transaction). They do it because they perceive you as being weak and unable to fight back effectively. Luckily, sometimes they are wrong.


So let's see if I understand . . . Attacking someone because of their skin color or their gender identity is definitely wrong, but singling them out and keeping them socially distinct and different so that you can offer them unique and special "protection" is O.K.? Both are forms of discrimination.

Once upon a time I was instrumental in the hiring of a young woman for a rather good job in our department. One day she came to me and said, "I have to ask you a question that I need you to answer honestly because otherwise it will bother me for the rest of my life. Was I hired because I was the best qualified applicant for the job? Or was I hired because I was a woman?"

I told her the truth, that she was hired because she was the best applicant.

"Preference," be it in hiring, or in special treatment under the law ("hate crime"), or in being singled out for a beating is just plain wrong.

Hugs,
Persephone.Agree.

[Persephone]

But, really, as a member of a minority group (LGBT), I'm surprised you would identify as conservative.

Precisely because I am a thinking individual able to understand the issues.

Persephone.

[ReineD]

Folks, I've had to delete three strongish political posts, and edited three or four others. This isn't about political parties. Please keep government involvement vs. non-involvement, liberal vs. conservative out of this thread and limit the discussion to the OP or hate crimes.

If members can't keep politics out of it to the point where it gets into a political debate (right wing vs. left wing), I will need to close this thread.

[Helen_Highwater]

There has recently been a high profile case in the UK of 2 men convicted of the killing of a young black man, the attack taking place some years ago but finally being brought before the courts, and, successfully prosecuted. This young man was attached because of the colour of his skin, because the perpetrators HATED him for that very fact.
I whole heartily agree that the punishment the perpetrators received should reflect the outcome and not carry a special "tariff". However in some cases there are mitigating circumstances, something which the law has always recognized, the difference between pre-meditated murder and manslaughter.

I understand the argument about positive discrimination leading to individuals asking if "Did I get the job because I'm worthy or because of my gender or sexual orientation" Can I suggest that that is a world apart from having a society where wife beating was acceptable and now one which gives women specific legal protection from domestic abuse. Positive discrimination is not the same as reinforcing in law that certain attitudes are wrong.

It is sometimes necessary to force change in society; you WILL wear a seat belt or a crash helmet, in order to bring about a change for the better. We here in this forum I would suggest have a natural tendency towards the libertarian, something that often opposes draconian legislation. However it is necessary to sometimes forcefully demonstrate that previously socially acceptable attitudes are no longer so and this is recognized by law

[DebbieL]

Folks, I've had to delete three strongish political posts, and edited three or four others. This isn't about political parties. Please keep government involvement vs. non-involvement, liberal vs. conservative out of this thread and limit the discussion to the OP or hate crimes.

Here in the United States, there are places, like Houston Texas, where gays and transgenders have been beaten to death and the perpetrators were charged with involuntary manslaughter, and given probation. On the other hand, when the victim fought back sufficiently to stop the attackers, they were charged with the maximum possible crime, and given the harshest possible sentence.

In my own case, my ex-wife had found someone, through her new husband's church, who would help her make sure that I never saw the kids again if I continued transition. She knew which social workers to talk to, and which judges to talk to, and could get the visitation rights issue in front of a judge who would be hostile to transgenders and friendly toward fundamentalist Christians. The city was Colorado Springs - headquarters for "Focus on the Family" - which in addition to being a source of programming for Christian radio stations, was also a forum for convicted Watergate conspirators Chuck Colson & G Gordon Liddy - who advocated anti-GLBT positions, including opposing the Mathew Sheppard act - which would have protected Gays and Transgenders.

Very hard to separate politics when there are those who openly advocate execution, beatings, and forced "conform to society's norms" - even if it means killing a few "deviants" to make an example. We often don't see the worst of the the vitriol in the news casts, but the United States is a very large country where attitudes range from very open in some cities like San Francisco and New York - to life-threatening in places like Houston, Mississippi, and Colorado Springs. Ironically, Colorado Springs is 75 miles from Denver, and they are two very different places. In Denver, there are clubs, support groups, and laws to protect the transgendered. In Colorado springs all the GLBT bars were shut down, and never allowed to re-open - even under new ownership.

But if I want to see my Daughter, or my grandchildren - I have to go to Colorado Springs.

[Badtranny]

Here in the United States, there are places, like Houston Texas, where gays and transgenders have been beaten to death and the perpetrators were charged with involuntary manslaughter, and given probation.

Yes the argument against hate crime legislation does seem a little odd. I don't want to make this a conservative versus liberal argument so let's just say, that a certain segment of people who don't want things to get better, like to pretend that all people are equal under current laws. The sad fact is that some are more equal than others and laws are argued and interpreted on a case by case basis. Someday it really won't matter what someone looks or acts like, but until then accommodations have to be made under force of law to protect those of us who are most vulnerable. A quick internet search will reveal dozens of cases in the last 10 years where TG women were murdered in cold blood by cowardly closet queens who received minimal jail time if any, because their lawyers (public defenders in some cases) successfully argued that the killer was so surprised and enraged by the victim's penis that they couldn't help themselves and became temporarily insane while they stabbed, or strangled, or bludgeoned the victim to death. After having sex of course.

Why hate crimes? Well, in cases like this you can either make good lawyering illegal, or you can make killing someone BECAUSE of their trans status an aggravating factor. You see, without the "protection" of law, a victim's trans status can be used against them by playing to the prevailing fears and prejudices of the time. The same thing applies to black folks, because there was a time when a black kid could be beaten at the very least just for showing some interest in a white girl. The perpetrators will freely admit the assault was BECAUSE he was black, but he should have known better. If he would have just known his place than he wouldn't have fallen into such unfortunate circumstances. Hate crime laws just add a little extra nudge to the idea that it's NOT okay to attack someone just because you don't like who they are. It's an imperfect solution for an imperfect justice system.

Why it offends a certain segment of the population so much, I'll never understand.

[Sally24]

Well said Melissa!

If there wasn't so much hate, we wouldn't need hate crime laws.

[JamieG]

My guess is that hate crimes are considered different from ordinary crimes because their are more victims. In addition to the direct victim or victims, there is everyone else in the same protected group who feels threatened because they are now being targeted. In essence, a hate crime is a kind of terroristic threat; they often occur because the perpetrators want that "kind" to know they aren't wanted around here.

[Sally24]

In essence, a hate crime is a kind of terroristic threat; they often occur because the perpetrators want that "kind" to know they aren't wanted around here.

Exactly! Not only do you have the original physical crime of assault, but you also have the threat to all others of that "group" that this will happen to you. It is an attempt to deprive some people of their constitutional rights of free assembly, association and speech!


So let's see if I understand . . . Attacking someone because of their skin color or their gender identity is definitely wrong, but singling them out and keeping them socially distinct and different so that you can offer them unique and special "protection" is O.K.? Both are forms of discrimination.

This is the same line of reasoning that those that hate other groups use. The whole "special rights" argument is a sham. What these laws at least attempt to do is to prevent or offset the real discrimination that already is taking place. If you follow this to its conclusion than we should repeal the civil rights laws of the 60's? I don't think so! Anyone who has lived in this country during the 60's and 70's knows that for minorities and women huge changes have taken place. That would not have been possible without those protections.


"Preference," be it in hiring, or in special treatment under the law ("hate crime")........... is just plain wrong.
Persephone.
Only bad policies or bad managers use the anti-discrimination laws to hire and promote on the basis of race or sex. The laws were meant to prevent ALL discrimination. Used properly they PREVENT a woman from NOT being hired because she is a woman. Quotas are no ones friend.

[Silentpartner GG SO]

Its been really interesting reading this thread- to read the different perceptions and feelings of others - especially how you feel when you go out en femme - being a GG I guess I have always has that self preservation instinct and try not to put myself into a situation which could be threatening but for a CD going out en femme for the first few times, it must be a revelation.

Sadly bigots and evil people exist everywhere - there are lots of places here in the UK I wouldnt go even in daylight on my own, in fact most inner cities!

I'm really sorry that anyone has had to endure such hatred purely based on the clothes they choose to wear- what next -get your head kicked in because you are wearing the wrong colour shirt, or the wrong brand of trainers?

[Badtranny]

The whole "special rights" argument is a sham.

Totally.

My whole family are tea bagger conservatives (I'm the pink sheep) and recently my mom and sister were visiting. We were having some wine after dinner and the conversation turned to gay marriage. My mom (religious) is against it but my sister (gun nut) said the government should stay out of it. Then my sister (who I adore) goes on to say "but I don't think they should have special rights". I said what special rights? .....She said, "ummmmmmm".

She couldn't name a single "special" right that homosexuals had or were asking for. All she knew was what she hears over and over from Rant Wing radio. Gay agenda this, and special rights that.

I told her she was plenty smart enough to think for herself and she should come to her own conclusions rather than someone else's. She said I was probably right. Yay, another mind opened just a crack.