Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think that guy would have gotten beat up in any city. Instead of trying to diffuse the situation, he helped escalate it. What's absurd is that he (and some forum members) is surprised by the result
By his statements, he seems to have a hero complex. Bar heroes end up in the hospital... in any town.
Agreed, even though he was not the initial agressor, he escalated the situation, inviting a confrontation, which he then recieved.
It is hard for me to feel much sympathy for the "victim" in this incident, as he appears to be enjoying his role a bit too much. In the "victim's" own words:
Quote:
I thought about what happened with the Shady Ladies – that those men weren’t caught, and [u]I was not going to tolerate that. I was not going to let these guys get away with just calling us that[/U].
The cops came up to us and just said, "Well, what happened? What caused them to do that to you? Why?" [here, Bobby begins to choke back emotion] Turning it around on us like it was our ****ing fault
And I may have provided “the bait” as the news calls it, but I don’t put up with **** like that...That’s showing them that no, I have a voice, and you’re going to hear it whether you like it or not. I’m gonna stand here, and I’m gonna fight you, and I’m not gonna run, and I’m not gonna hide.
In his own words, he knew he was inviting an altercation.
It seems to me that the "victim" is enjoying his role a bit too much:
Quote:
I immediately took a snap shot of my face and posted it on Facebook because I wanted to show everybody what happened to me before any of the swelling or bruising went down.
I went through this whole newspaper and did not see anything until I really looked under Metro & State under Local Briefing, second page, B2, to be exact, under Central Texas Digest, second article: "Two men attacked downtown." I had pretty much 30-45 minutes of talking with a reporter, and it’s really shocking that there’s nothing but six paragraphs. And it’s depressing. It’s revolting, and it really pisses me off that it’s just such a big issue, but yet, it’s just such a small article. To the naked eye, you really have to look for it. And not even a headline.
I thought about this today I was walking, close to where I live – in a very highly populated area. I am afraid to walk alone right now. I was thinking: What more can I do to make people aware? and I really want to start a campaign: A "I’m a victim of a hate crime" T-shirt or something. Not to sell for me, but just to put the word out there. I’ve seen the "I am positive HIV" shirts out there. I haven’t really seen anything about a hate crime. Yet, now, I am a victim of a hate crime. I would love for the community to get together and give each other and me ideas on what we could do to grow instead of just protesting and rallying, we need to do more than that.
I think it's a bit disingenuous to look at captrn's post and call it "heinous" or even worse, to classify it as a "blame the victim" post (likely just as prevalent as the "be a victim" posts). Being a bicyclist, I know that there have been instances where you insert the word "bicycler" instead of "gay" and the exact same results have occurred. And if you read what captrn posted, that is the gist of it. That this is incident isn't necessarily indicative of Austin as a whole being less gay tolerant but more of an instance of someone deciding to stand up for themselves but doing it against a person or group whose natural response is to escalate things physically. That part I don't think has really changed all that much in the years that I've been here and I know that bicyclists and blacks/hispanics have been on the receiving end of this for a long time now.
I don't think the yelling back was pathetic. What is pathetic is that the guy thought it'd somehow make everything better. It didn't, and 99% of the time it won't. He's being obviously threatened. If it were just one guy with a gun instead of 5 guys with fists, should he yell back? According to some of you, he should because he's standing up for himself. I, personally, don't find it very intelligent.
First, there apparently was no gun; had there been, then I believe we'd be dealing with people trying to justify murder instead of simply trying to justify assault.
Second, he wasn't alone; he had at least one other person with him. Having a second person changes the dynamic a bit.
Third, the gay community, our public schools, and society in general has taught for over a generation that you stand up to bullies. I continue to be flabbergasted that some in this forum seem to want to denigrate the victim for doing what every PSA on Saturday morning since 1980 has told them to do.
Fourth, you don't know whether "things are better" as a result of the incident or not. Sure, the victim's physically beat up; but his emotional state appears energized and empowered. That may be much better than refusing to be "uppity" and living in a shadow of low self-esteem for the rest of his life because some neanderthals get their woodies by bullying *****s.
Quote:
For those of you trying to compare this to racial issues, let's not forget Rev. King. He understood that there was a time and place to stand up for your beliefs. It was not at 1:30am outside a bar. It did not involve directly taunting/arguing with those who opposed those beliefs.
Quote:
"You know, that **** is not welcomed here! Our city does not accept that! Get out! You do not belong here!" Then the driver came out and said, "What the **** did you tell me, ******?" And I said, "You know what I ****ing said. Get out; it’s not welcomed here."
Where exactly in this exchange is the taunting by the victim?
Look, people, I think everyone here can agree that the gay-bashers committed an unacceptable crime.
Actually, what I hear from some on this thread is that the gay-bashers commited an acceptable crime. Sure, they might get caught and get fined or a bit of punishment, but so what? None of this would have ever happened if that nancy had just kept his mouth shut.
It is hard for me to feel much sympathy for the "victim" in this incident, as he appears to be enjoying his role a bit too much.
Wow. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess I shouldn't have. I see that you only think sympathy should be afforded to victims unless they keep their heads down, keep their mouths shut, and don't complain to the local media. Then it's okay for us to feel sympathy for them. Have you ever shouted at anyone in your life? By your logic, if you did prior to being physically assaulted, you wouldn't be worth any sympathy. You wouldn't even be a "victim," because you had the audacity to respond to someone who was intimidating you.
Do you know what a hate crime is? Here's a definition: Hate Crime Law & Legal Definition
This is more serious than two drunk people getting into an argument that results in a fight. This is about a segment of society being singled out because of their sexual orientation and intimidated exclusively for that reason. This is serious. This is a big deal. Whether or not people shout back isn't the point. Nobody in Austin should feel afraid to participate in public life because of their race, gender, religion or sexuality. I feel this fear when someone wants to hold my hand, hug me, or kiss me on the cheek. My eyes dart around and I wonder if I'm in a "safe" environment. This is something that you, sir, never have to think about. You take it for granted. And your cavalier attitude towards those of us who have to struggle with this on a regular basis is insulting.
Wow. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess I shouldn't have. I see that you only think sympathy should be afforded to victims unless they keep their heads down, keep their mouths shut, and don't complain to the local media. Then it's okay for us to feel sympathy for them. Have you ever shouted at anyone in your life? By your logic, if you did prior to being physically assaulted, you wouldn't be worth any sympathy. You wouldn't even be a "victim," because you had the audacity to respond to someone who was intimidating you.
Do you know what a hate crime is? Here's a definition: Hate Crime Law & Legal Definition
This is more serious than two drunk people getting into an argument that results in a fight. This is about a segment of society being singled out because of their sexual orientation and intimidated exclusively for that reason. This is serious. This is a big deal. Whether or not people shout back isn't the point. Nobody in Austin should feel afraid to participate in public life because of their race, gender, religion or sexuality. I feel this fear when someone wants to hold my hand, hug me, or kiss me on the cheek. My eyes dart around and I wonder if I'm in a "safe" environment. This is something that you, sir, never have to think about. You take it for granted. And your cavalier attitude towards those of us who have to struggle with this on a regular basis is insulting.
Have a nice day, and enjoy your privilege.
I don't believe Ammonman saying that at all. If I were in that situation (and I have been in similar incidents because I was black), my survival instinct would have kicked in and I would run. I wouldn't have argued with these strangers for 2 minutes and fight 2 of them, somehow thinking none of the other boys wouldn't step in to help their friends. I would be 2 blocks away speeding at MACH 3!!
Life isn't fair. But, everyone has inherent obstacles to fight (some more than others; some others few to none), there are times to stand your ground, and then, there are times when one must think rationally and overcome your feelings or personal violation and rage.
More than anything, you have to survive. The battle for equality can't be won with needless confrontation, violence, or death.
Yes, the victims are not responsible for throwing the first punch, but, it was his decision to argue with the perps. Late at night with alcohol was probably a factor, so not a good idea. The police will find the victims partially responsible for the escalation.
As a result, the incident does qualify an example of anti-gay violence, but (with the extended period of arguing and probable heavy alcohol consumption) it is not a clear cut bias attack - due to the 3 minute mutual escalation period.
I don't believe Ammonman saying that at all. If I were in that situation (and I have in similar incidents because I was black), my survival instinct would have kicked in and I would run. I wouldn't have argued with these strangers for 2 minutes and fight 2 of them, somehow thinking none of the other boys wouldn't step in their boys. I would be 2 blocks away speeding at MACH 3!!
They didn't argue for 2 minutes, they yelled a few sentences back. They didn't "fight 2 of them," they were assaulted by five men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImOnFiya
Life isn't fair. But, everyone has inherent obstacles to fight (some more than others; some others few or none), there are times to stand your ground, and then, there are times when one must think rationally and overcome your feelings or personal violation and rage.
That's true. I certainly would have kept quiet. But I'm a good little gay boy, and some of us are more outspoken. It still doesn't justify physical assault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImOnFiya
Yes, the victims are not responsible for throwing the first punch, but, it was his decision to argue with the perps. Late at night with alcohol probably involved, not a good idea. The police will find the victims partially responsible for the escalation.
Uh, no. You're telling me that if it's late at night, alcohol is involved, and a woman "escalates" the situation by kissing a man, she's partially responsible for getting raped? I didn't think so. Yes, the victim could've handled this better, but that doesn't justify the actions of the perpetrators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImOnFiya
As a result, the incident does qualify an example of anti-gay violence, but (with the extended period of arguing and probably alcohol consumption) it is not a clear cut bias attack.
This doesn't even make sense to me. It's an example of anti-gay violence, but not a clear cut bias attack? As opposed to being a clear cut bias attack, but not an example of anti-gay violence? And once again, even if you've consumed alcohol and you yell back at a perpetrator, that does not change the fact that a crime took place!
That's true. I certainly would have kept quiet. But I'm a good little gay boy, and some of us are more outspoken. It still doesn't justify physical assault.
Never said it did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ammonman
Uh, no. You're telling me that if it's late at night, alcohol is involved, and a woman "escalates" the situation by kissing a man, she's partially responsible for getting raped? I didn't think so. Yes, the victim could've handled this better, but that doesn't justify the actions of the perpetrators.
Never said that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ammonman
This doesn't even make sense to me. It's an example of anti-gay violence, but not a clear cut bias attack? As opposed to being a clear cut bias attack, but not an example of anti-gay violence? And once again, even if you've consumed alcohol and you yell back at a perpetrator, that does not change the fact that a crime took place!
Never said that either. Listen to what people are trying to say.
You are very quickly jumping to your absolute view point. No one is buying it because of the extended altercation period.
I won't post it because of the length and profanity, but there was no extended altercation period. I counted exactly six sentences the victim said in response to the perp. Six sentences. Hardly an "extended altercation period."
And even if there was, it doesn't change the dimensions of the situation. Of course I'm not implying that you're justifying rape or physical assault. I'm trying to apply your logic to analogous situations to show you how absurd it is. Even if an argument precedes a crime it does not lessen the perpetrators actions. Same goes for alcohol.
And even if there was, it doesn't change the dimensions of the situation. Of course I'm not implying that you're justifying rape or physical assault. I'm trying to apply your logic to analogous situations to show you how absurd it is. Even if an argument precedes a crime it does not lessen the perpetrators actions. Same goes for alcohol.
As I said, is it clear you have made up your mind. No matter what anyone tells you: you are going to believe what you want to believe. There is no give and take with you.
So, what is your point?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
