News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


Are Trans People Like Angie And Me Deceptive?

by: Autumn Sandeen

Sun Apr 19, 2009 at 04:22:30 AM EDT



Sharon Dunn of the Greeley Tribune began her Saturday piece Angie Zapata's friends, family take the stand this way:

Angie Zapata's sisters Monica Murguia, left, and Ashley Zapata, fight back their tearsThe first few times, it almost seemed like the public defenders were misspeaking.

But then, those watching the murder trial of Allen Andrade started muttering under their breaths. Witnesses on the stand continued to correct the attorneys questioning them.

Family members and friends echoed repeatedly, "my sister," "Angie," one by one on the stand Friday as public defenders Annette Kundelius and Brad Martin questioned them about "Justin."

Summarizing the two things that will effect me for quite awhile that I saw in the courtroom Friday are 1.) seeing the crime scene photos and video of Angie, lying dead on the floor, a pool of dried blood around her head, and 2.) watching and hearing a classic trans panic strategy being used by the defense during the prosecution presentation portion of the trial.

Angie ZapataFrankly, I'm in reporter mode, so I'm a bit detached from the trial right now. But, in the back of my mind I can "feel" the images of the crime scene photos and video burned in my mind -- forever burned into my memory. I will never forget those images. I know I'll have my reaction to these "burned in" images later, when I'm back home in San Diego.

What had me irritated in the courtroom Friday, and still finds me irritated about now, is the trans panic (or gay panic) strategy -- a "crime of passion," "blame the victim" strategy -- being used in the court. It's apparent to me that the defense attorneys have schooled themselves on the "proper" way to run a trans panic strategy, as they used the word "duped" in the pretrial hearing, and now in the trial are using the more classic trans panic strategy term "deception." The defense attorney's are also following the trans panic strategy of never conceding that Angie was known as Angie, and never conceding that she was a young, teenage female. The defense attorneys instead always refer to her by her male name, and always refer to her by male pronouns.

I noticed something too that a trans woman like me would notice, but reporters like Sharon Dunn and Beth Karas hadn't noticed, but I pointed out to them why something from Angie's autopsy was highlighted. During cross examination of the Crime Scene Investigator (CSI) who attended the autopsy, the defense attorney questioning the CSI highlighted clothing that had been removed from Angie's body. These included a camisole, a bra, and "breast gels." The "breast gels" would be silicone breast forms. The reason the defense attorney's highlighted these are to use this information later to "prove" Angie "_____" (male name) wasn't a real woman -- they will no doubt argue "he" had to wear breast forms to create the "deception" that "he" had breasts.

This intentional trans panic/blame-the-victim strategy of always referring to Angie by her male name and by male pronouns was never more clear when Stephanie Zapata, Angie's sister, took the stand. Every time the defense attorney referred to Angie by male pronouns or by Angie's male name, Stephanie corrected her by saying "You mean my sister,..." or "You mean my sister Angie,..." -- Stephanie never gave an inch. I don't know how many times she forcefully corrected the defense attorney, but it was definitely significantly over a dozen times. And when Monica Zapata (also known as Monica Murguia) took the stand, she wasn't as forceful, but she consistently referred to Angie as Angie, and always referred to her as her sister, and by female pronouns.

All in all, five of Angie's relatives took the stand and  only using the name Angie, and always referring to her by female pronouns. And, every time the defense attorney's questioned these five family members, they always referred to her by her male name, and always used male pronouns. Everyone was in the gallery that I talked to after the trial was done for the day Friday noticed it, and one even commented that the defense strategy of consistently referring to Angie by her male name and male pronouns when every family member, many visibly hurting at the loss of their sister/sister-in-law/offspring, were referring to Angie as Angie, and calling her by female pronouns. On person told me that it seemed "rude," and wondered if the strategy of antagonizing at least Stephanie Zapata, would backfire because it looked like such rude behavior. Gawds, I hope so.

Autumn Sandeen :: Are Trans People Like Angie And Me Deceptive?
Frankly though, I'm a lot like Angie. While I have changed my male name legally to Autumn back in 2003, I, like Angie, am a pre-operative transsexual. And, as Angie's sister Monica said she saw Angie always do to people to strangers she met who she realized she may see again -- especially men who appeared attracted to her and engaged her -- I out myself often and frequently to strangers I meet. And much like Angie, I have "passing privilege," and just as Angie had many young men interested in her, and flirting with her, since I lost that 135 pounds I have many 35-and-older men interested in me, and flirting with me. And, just as Angie was rarely read as trans, so too am I rarely read as trans. And just like Angie, I'm the number 4 child of 5 children.

If I were to be killed in Colorado -- or most other states in the United States, for that matter -- would my killer use a trans panic defense against me, saying, like Allen Ray Andrade's defense attorney's are saying about Angie, that I'm "deceptive"? When am I not "deceptive" in my life -- when I use women's restrooms? When my driver's license has an F as my gender marker? When I don't out myself to the grocery clerk or the coffee house barista? When I breathe?

The stunning reality is that my life, and the lives of my transgender peers, are worth less than the lives of those who fit into the gender binary. And, that's because if someone killed one of my peers or me, they can use a trans or gay panic, blame-the-victim strategy to say my peers or I have been "deceptive," and were killed because my peers or I were born with genitalia that didn't match our gender identity and/or gender expression. And, while it might not clear a killer of a trans person like my peers or me, it may midtigate their what degree of homicide that killer might receive, and in turn lessen the sentence that killer might receive.

That's a sobering thought.

And, what's so bizarre about this is that transgender status is a protected class under Colorado's Bias Motivated Crimes statute under the term sexual orientation. Specifically, sexual orientation is defined as follows:

"Sexual orientation" means a person's actual or perceived orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status.

The defense in the Angie Zapata Hate Crime Murder Trial is in effect using Angie's membership in a protected class to justify her killing. Think of it this way: If a white supremacist in Colorado dated a Jewish woman who hadn't disclosed this before the two had kissed intimately, and the white supremacist, in an alleged heat of passion moment, killed the Jewish woman because of her faith or her ethnicity. If the white supremacist's defense attorney argued before the jury that the Jewish woman was "deceptive" for not disclosing she was Jewish before the two kissed, do you believe that this defense would persuade a jury? Of course not -- being Jewish by faith or ethnicity would be protected classes under the Colorado. You can't successfully on one hand say that that faith and ethnicity are protected classes against bias motivated crimes, and then use the Jewish woman membership in a protected class as a defense.

And yet, with the gay panic and trans panic strategies of blaming the victim for being "deceptive," that's exactly what the defense is doing in the Angie Zapata Hate Crime Murder Trial; the defense is using Angie's transgender status to say she was being "deceptive" -- they are using Angie's membership in a protected class to blame her -- the victim -- for her own death.

What is the point of having a hate crime statute that includes transgender status in it's language if defendants and defense attorneys can use that membership in the transgender community as a reason to blame a victim for his or her own death? The same arguments that public defenders Annette Kundelius and Brad Martin are arguing before the jury to blame Angie for her own death apply to me too.

If someone were to kill me in Colorado (or most other states in the United States) this week, how much less would the sentence of my killer be if he or she said they killed me because I was being "deceptive" when I drank coffee at Café Woody's this past morning? Or "deceptive" bought cheese sticks at the King Soopers grocery store this past afternoon? Or "deceptive" when I used the sink in an Olive Garden restaurant's women's restroom to clean my prescription rose colored glasses this past evening?

Are trans people like Angie and me always to be considered "deceptive" wherever we go, and whatever we do?

I know the answers to all these questions. I'm not being deceptive. I am who I present myself to people I meet, even when I don't make it a point to out myself.

Angie wasn't deceptive either. Angie lived who she was. Justice for Angie should include the recognition she was a human being -- a human being who was loved, and is sorely missed by her family and friends. I just can't imagine that justice for Angie would include giving any credence to the idea that Angie's transgender status is in any way a justification for her killing.

.

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I wouldn't call it being deceptive.
 Although if you read the definition of deceive
But then again I am a transexual and I know you are living as the woman you are. Most people would not expect a woman to have a penis.  The same would be true as well for a man, when nekked you wouldn't expect to see a va-jay-jay.

I am going to skip to the breast gels, a lot of natal women us them as well.  Would a natal woman who uses them be deceiving a man who is expecting to find a full set of boobs?  What if a natal woman was wearing padded undies to give her more curves?

The answers could be the same.  In this dress, adding a cup size makes me look more attractive and the padded panties gives me a better look would that be considered being deceptive?  

It all comes down to how you look at the situation.  Again, I get the transgender issue that we are presenting as who we are.  We are not intentionally trying to fool people.  

In no way would I blame Angie for her death. Now just like Gwen Araujo, I do believe Angie was playing with fire trying to date men while still having the parts. We don't know when Mr. Andrade knew of her transgender status.  Like I said in the other article, Angie might have thought Mr. Andrade was a compassionate man that would be understanding, we don't know and sadly Angie isn't here to tell her side of the story.

At the same time, if the plan was to get sexually intimate, then yes, I would have to say Angie was being deceptive.  If Mr. Andrade is to be believed and Angie didn't tell him until right before he Murdered her, yes that would be deception. We don't know when he knew, if he knew 36 hours before as the prosecution says, then their wasn't any deception.  And judging from the Trans people I know, they would have been upfront long before inviting someone to their house.  

But to your question,
Are Trans People Like Angie And Me Deceptive?
Hell No.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


"Deception" is an odd word
Most people assume me to be someone who eats beef, not because of any evidence, but because most people do eat beef, so that's just the assumption people make.  It's not a lie if I fail to correct that assumption preemptively.  It's only relevant to bring up if I'm going to be involved in activity which involves food, but I rarely mention my vegetarianism unless it comes up.

Similarly, it was several months of working for my current employer before I even used the word "lesbian."  I didn't say anything about it, but when my partner wanted on to my dental insurance, I talked to HR and found out what I needed to do to take care of it.  I mentioned it where relevant.  I mention her casually, in passing, the same way anyone at work mentions their spouse, but I don't say "we're lesbians" or any other such thing.  If someone asks directly, I tell them, but the only time I've brought it up preemptively at work was to have a conversation with the president of the organization to tell him how completely impressed I was with the nonchalance with which they treated it (he had sent out an e-mail on their diversity project and I wanted to give him feedback and especially give credit to the HR department for making it such a non-issue).

This is my long way of saying that no one needs to know what sort of sexual organs someone else has.  They may want to know, and they may think they have a right to know, but unless there is going to be some actual direct involvement  with those sexual organs, it's no one's business.

The idea that I have a right to know what the shape of someone else's private parts look like is absolutely psychotic.  

I'm only a click away.


Yes They Do
Most definitely a heterosexual man does "need to know" the sexual organs of the "woman" he is going out with.  It is most certainly "his business".

[ Parent ]
Troll rated...
...for putting the word "woman" in quotes.

I'm only a click away.

[ Parent ]
I think...
the use of the word deceptive is only a way of trying to justify bigotry.
I have read a few times that they had sex. Is that true?? Not that it would in ANY way justify his actions. I'm just wondering how that could be possible without realizing there were no breasts and a penis... Just my own stupidity I guess, but if he did have sex how could he not know, unless he was only worried about his own needs not Angie's...  

...... Next time someone gives you a hard time for being LGBT... just ask them if they are unenlightened...or closeted

Thrying to defend the indefensible, yep.
How do you "justify" homicide? Declare the victim unhuman of course.  

[ Parent ]
Trans panic = hate
It's pretty simple, really:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broad...

"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant."  The Colbert Report


The ugly truth is
  That defense attorneys use the "deception" defense because it works. Most people don't know any better or equate being transgender with being gay. In point of fact, I was once asked why I don't, "just admit that (I am), gay, and be done with it". Obviously among the readers here I don't have to explain why that question is so ludicrous but for visitors I must point out that it's like comparing peas to pumpkins: They are entirely different things, or as Johnny Slash would say, "It's a totally different head. Totally".
 The reason the deception and gay panic defenses work is because to most people, we are characters in movies like "Psycho" and "Dressed to Kill" and "The Silence of the Lambs" and unless they know a transgendered person personally, we are a performers in the show at a drag club or participants in Mardi Gras. We are killers or clowns in the public imagination and therefore less than human.
 Typical of most Republicans, my dad made fun of or derided transgendered people until he found out that I am one. Then and only then did he take the time to do some reading on the subject. Though he came to accept me, he was absolutley delighted to learn that I have Klinefelter's syndrome, (XXY chromosome), because despite all of his reading, he still thought of my condition as "mental illness", and it relieved him no end that now he could tell his judgemental friends that I have a "real" medically demonstrable "cause", to point to in explaining me. (For the record, there is very little evidence that Klinefelter's syndrome significantly increases the incidence of being transgendered) This led to an estrangement with my father that lasted until his death. I could never forgive him for working so hard to "explain me" in a way that wouldn't cause his friends to view him in a less favorable light. What his friends thought was apparently far more important to him than my happiness was, though he would never have admitted that. (Why are Republicans so repressed?)
 So to some clueless, (and frankly bigoted), gay men, to most of the hetero public at large, to screen writers, to jury pools and to my dad, we are less than human. Much less. And the deception defense and the pronouns are always going to be abused and exploited until it becomes general knowledge how very ridiculous and offensive it is. People will only stop using it when it stops working.

That is just awful
that they kept using the wrong pronouns and calling her Justin.

If I were trans, and it were my Mom on the stand...she would've brought the questioning to a halt and demanded the defense stop disrespecting the dead and insulting the family by using the wrong pronoun and name. I don't fault the family for NOT doing that, but my family can be quite fiesty.


No, you aren't being deceptive
and neither was Angie.  As Julie Waters said above, the fact that people make unfounded assumptions and then blame us for their upset when they discover they've made fools of themselves doesn't mean that we're being deceptive.  It means that they haven't (or won't) adapt themselves to the reality of the world in which we live.  We are not to blame for whatever embarrassment or other emotion they suffer because of their ignorance, willful or otherwise.

As for the trans panic defense, I have no doubt that the jury will see quite clearly what the defense is doing and, yes, will see and resent the disrespect that the defense attorneys' strategy represents every time they open their mouths.  I'm also confident that they will see that Andrade can't have it both ways.  Yes, Andrade's attorneys are claiming that his anger was about being deceived, not because Angie was trans, and, therefore, it wasn't a hate crime.  But that's bull, and the jury knows it.  No one kills because they've been deceived; they kill because of what they've been deceived about and how it threatens their view of themselves and the world around them.  It's possible that the jury will decide that Angie's murder wasn't premeditated and, therefore, convict him of second, rather than first, degree murder, and may even reduce it to a Class 3, from a Class 2 felony, but they will also see that Andrade's defense is an admission that he killed Angie because she was trans and convict him of the hate crime allegation.  


To quote House:
"Everybody lies".

If it's "deceptive" to not run around announcing personal information about yourself then we're all deceptive. I found out someone was Jewish the other day. I didn't know he was Jewish. I had never asked him before.

Can I now murder him and claim "Jew panic"?? But I feel so deceived!! I don't like surprises. Maybe we can make it easier to identify these people somehow. A symbol sewn into their clothes, perhaps?

This is all bullshit.


Exactly
Would the defense be allowed to use "Jew panic" or "White panic" is someone found out that they were part African-American?

Why then is it allowable to use Trans or Gay panic defense?

Will we have to prove our religious, ethnic and medical histories when we date someone and get them to sign a discloser statement?  


[ Parent ]
Hitler's Nazis tried to eliminate deception...
Certain minorities had to wear different colored stars on their clothing to make it clear that they were Jews or homosexuals.

Perhaps our federal government could create and implement a mandatory system of clearly identifying every person's government-determined race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identification, criminal history, marital status, political affiliation, and everything else with tattoos or sew-on patches or whatever, and everyone would be required to immediately display their "markers" when meeting others. If such a system had been in effect, Andrade would have immediately clearly known that Angie was a single, pre-operative transsexual latina, and Ms. Zapata would have known about Andrade's homophobic, allegedly homocidal tendencies. No deceptions then, right?

Then we could move on to perfecting Hitler's "final solution" for those branded with the wrong markers.

Or we could try to prove that we are the most intelligent creatures on Earth by being helpful, tolerant and understanding of others. Yeah, right. Good luck on that one.

Still, I try.


[ Parent ]
Ever read personal ads?
So is it open season now on anyone who "enhanced" their profile in a personal ad or padded their resume?  I like where the defense is going with this, because I believe that we simply have too many people in this world already.  Now I'll have a legal justification for killing them one by one.  Anyone who I claim doesn't live up to my mental image of them or to what they've claimed about themselves, look out!

Ok, that was snark, but only just a little.  Should my parents have been able to lawfully kill me after I came out, because I had been pretending to be heterosexual before that time?  They were pretty upset!  Maybe shocked parents better start murdering those dupsters they raised.

The truth as I see it is this:  our society taught Andrade to be sick at the thought of coming near another penis (no matter who wore it) sexually because, they told him, that equates to femaleness.  And we all know that being a man is defined as NOT BEING A WOMAN.  The guy is responsible for his actions, but the underlying criminals in this case are James Dobson, Phyllis Schlafly, George Bush, Rubin Diaz, Michelle Bachmann, Gary Randall, and likely your Roman Catholic bishop or AME minister who tell Andrade and everyone of us every day that being a man means dominating women and NEVER, EVER ADOPTING 'FEMALE' TRAITS, including sexual desire for anyone who has male or masculine elements to their body.

Lurleen on Twitter


Can Someone Explain To Me Why They Are Allowed To Use Male Pronouns?
Why does the judge allow that?  She lived as a woman.  She was known to others as a woman.  She was known to her family as being tg/ts.  So why does the judge allow this disrespectful display by the defense?

Deceptive?  HELL NO!

Society is the one with the dysphoria.  They are the ones who have a massive problem denying the natural diversity of human experience on this planet.  I am just stunned that we are even talking about this in the 21st century!  Anyone who knows anything about sex and gender (2 separate things) knows life is much, much more complicated than simple male/female heteronormativity.

I like to say that if men are from Mars and women are from Venus, than tg/ts folks are the only ones from Earth!  We have a better understanding of sex, gender and the human condition than other people.


It appears to me
that the problem began when the State made the mistake of charging Andrade with the murder of "[Male name] Zapata, also know as Angie Zapata," instead of recognizing that she had legally changed  her name by common law usage by that time.  If they had identified her simply as "Angie," it's unlikely that the judge would allow the defense to refer to Angie as a male.

[ Parent ]
This is fraught
Deceptive is a loaded word, and there are others I would prefer (naive and insecure come to mind), but yes, in this limited circumstance, Angie was being deceptive. Is it understandable, under the circumstances? Absolutely. She was young, just figuring herself out, and didn't have the experience or confidence to handle this situation. Does it in any way justify murder? Not even close. I can't think of anything short of threat of immediate and potentially fatal assault that justifies murder. Might the guy get away with it? Yes, he might. And that sucks, and I'm sorry. The blame is entirely his, and none is Angie's, but absent a disclosure before sex had occurred, she was withholding critical information. While it may have led to what happened, it doesn't justify what happened, but murder wouldn't have been committed without it. For her own safety, she should have disclosed, and I think that needs to be said for the safety of people reading this who might find themselves in the same situation.

Blaming the victim is terrible, but glossing over the reality we live in isn't productive. In this reality, sexual partners need to know before sex occurs if there are any irregularities regarding genitalia.

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing


Angie's Sister Monica Stated In Court Angie "Always" Disclosed, and too...

...The prosecution is arguing that Allen Ray Andrade knew Angie was trans at least 36 hours before he killed her because, they argue, that he was he was in traffic court with Angie, and heard the court refer to Angie by her male name.

It's very, very unlikely, in my mind, that disclosure didn't happen -- I don't believe at all the the murder played out in any manner as Adrade described in his confession. I believe the trans panic strategy is one that Andrade's defense is hoping will midigate his admitted killing of Angie from an F1 felony to an F3 felony, and that's why the defense is arguing Angie didn't disclose her trans status, when hey -- it's incredibly more likely that she did.

Again, this is just my just my opinion based on Angie's past behavior, as described by Angie's sister Monica, and that Andrade allegedly went to court with Angie and heard the court call Angie by her male name.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau


[ Parent ]
I don't care...
...whether or not she disclosed in advance.  The mere idea that whether or not she disclosed should make a difference in this trial is repugnant.

I'm only a click away.

[ Parent ]
That was some might fancy footwork
trying to make us all believe that you're not blaming Angie for her own murder, but you failed utterly. You say that Angie's alleged "deception" "may have led to what happened," but that doesn't justify it.  So, it was her fault, even though it wasn't justified?  I doubt that convoluted logic is going to be of much comfort to Angie's family and friends, or the rest of the trans community.

You and every other person who comes in with this argument start by assuming that the story told by her admitted murderer, a 6 time loser, is true.  Since when is an admitted murderer more credible than his victim?  Is it simply because she's not here to tell her side of the story, so you have to assume that Andrade's self-justifying, blame-the-victim story, the only story you've heard so far, is true?  How about applying a little good ol' American common sense and skepticism?

Angie may have been young, but it's very clear she wasn't naive. Besides, even if what Andrade claims is true, why is it Angie's fault that he made an unfounded assumption about who she was?  If he didn't want to be with a trans woman, why wasn't his, not Angie's, but his responsibility to find that out before doing something that he might regret?  How the hell was Angie supposed to know that the fact that she was trans was "critical information"?  Are you saying that all of us need to go back in the closet and never date because someone's homo- and/or transphobia might rear its ugly head and result in our murders?  Sorry but I ain't buying it.  Not one little bit.


[ Parent ]
I don't think it matters whether the killer's story is true
Or whether the mom and sister are correct. None of this makes Angie less dead or the killer less worthy of doing natural life.

The question  to me is, how do we find meaning in this senseless violence?

After Matt Shepherd was killed, my mom said the following to me:

"I know that when you were younger (living an isolated life in the rural Midwest where everyone knew I was the town queer) you were lonely, but now I'm just so grateful that you knew that you couldn't trust anyone. I mean, how awful for that poor boy's parents. They wanted him to have dignity and pride in himself--but they raised him to think that he lived in a world in which a gay teenager can take a ride from strangers."

While this was coming from a place of identifying with the victim's parents, it also sounds like blaming the victim. And it is.

It's also got an essential and important truth to it. Ask Larry Kramer; most younger gays don't want to think about the extent to which our culture expresses hate for us. This is the world we live in, it's the world in which I was assaulted and victimized as a teen, it's the world that Matt and Angie both died in.

While we make a better world, it's probably best to emphasize teaching our youth harm reduction techniques for managing the world we have now. That includes aggressive accountability in dating relationships. Not because no one who's trans should date, but because we want our kids to live long lives.

But wait, there's more!


[ Parent ]
Hmm
Actually, I thought QISC was quite clear that the murderer should not be excused.  Explanation and excuse are two different things - just ask anyone who's ever been pulled over for a forgetful traffic violation.

I'd construe QISC's comment as "lock the bastard up - but, if you're trans, be aware that there are other bastards out there and be ready to act accordingly".  It's an absolute travesty that there are people in this world who can't accept trans folks... but ignoring a bear doesn't de-claw it.


[ Parent ]
This is exactly what I was talking about
Besides, even if what Andrade claims is true, why is it Angie's fault that he made an unfounded assumption about who she was?  If he didn't want to be with a trans woman, why wasn't his, not Angie's, but his responsibility to find that out before doing something that he might regret?

I hope the weather on your planet is as nice as the people. Welcome to Earth, and you need to be aware that people on this planet aren't as nice. On this planet, people tend to make broad assumptions all the time; we call it "human nature".

It's great to think about what might be, or could be. I do it all the time, but I certainly don't live my life - or recommend other people live their lives - on could. Doing that could wind up with you dead, or badly hurt. What purpose does that serve?

Extending your logic, women should be running around the docks in short skirts and boob tubes, in the middle of the night. They're likely to wind up dead or raped, but we can all sit around and talk about how they should be able to do that, and that will make it all better. I guess in your mind, acknowledging the reality we live in - one where animals roam free and can and do commit rape and murder - is just one of those things we rail about, but don't take basic precautions to prevent. It's a stupid, short-sighted approach to life, but hey, knock yourself out.

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing


[ Parent ]
All my blessings
Frankly, I'm in reporter mode, so I'm a bit detached from the trial right now. But, in the back of my mind I can "feel" the images of the crime scene photos and video burned in my mind -- forever burned into my memory. I will never forget those images. I know I'll have my reaction to these "burned in" images later, when I'm back home in San Diego.

I wish you the best with that Autumn. It's been three years since the conclusion of the Araujo trial, and I still struggle with some of what happened in that trial.


Thank you.

Thank you for your thoughts, Gwen.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox