I am outraged that Time Magazine would use a child's death to minimize violence against LGBT kids.

[readmoreoften]

This Time Magazine piece on Lawrence King, the 8th grade gay boy who was shot to death in the middle of class by a bully. The bulk of the piece attacks GLSEN, an organization that protects LGBT youth from violence, then goes onto speculate that another hate crime was committed by a bisexual (you know the spiel: all those gay bashers are just a bunch of repressed homos so why bother good straight people like us with this tripe...) Of course, he calls the killer a "sweet-faced boy...who hasn't started shaving."

Paragraph Three of Time's Article:

<But while King's short life and violent death are surpassingly sad, it's not clear that officials at E.O. Green Junior High, his school, "looked the other way." What's more, the task force is exaggerating the frequency of assaults on gay kids, the vast majority of whom make it through school safe and happy.>

What's the exaggeration? Mr. Time goes on to say:

"only 18% of gay and transgender students said they had ever been assaulted because of their sexual orientation"

Only 18%! ONLY 18?!!! Let me translate for you:

"Hey you dykes and sissies, when I was a kid we beat the fuck of out of little faggots like you every day. Consider yourselves lucky that 82% of you get off scot free."

For the love of all that's holy and good, an eighth grader was shot point blank in the middle of class for being gay and Time Magazine's response is "most gay children don't get shot to death in school, so let's not overreact."

How could you attack the only people fighting for this dead, abused child? You use this boy's death to oppose hate crime legislation and then accuse his defenders of exaggeration and politicizing. Time Magazine, have you any decency?

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1714214,00.html

[Hissyspit]

1. K&R, but Link? n/t

[readmoreoften]

2. Sorry. Edited for link.

I was so sad and disgusted that I forgot.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

3. I read that earlier and had a similar reaction

You posted a much more eloquent post than I ever could have on the topic.

K&R

[readmoreoften]

8. The sad thing is this antigay stuff is so subtle most people easily dismiss it.

The media waffled for days on openly reporting that the child was openly gay, and now that they are it's attached to a string of excuses for the killer, and *somehow* the gay community itself is indicted. It goes on to say that the same number of kids report being taunted for being LGBT as report being taunted for other aspects of physical appearance. But when has anyone been shot in the head during class over a haircut or wearing hand-me-downs or being over/under weight? Not to say that bullying isn't a big issue, not to minimize any other issue, but why does THIS issue have to be minimized at the moment of a child's death... particularly a child with few advocates, a child living in an institution for abused children?

Why is the media indicting GLSEN and not HOMOPHOBIA? This is the kind of thing that will be published in history books 40 years from now and students will be baffled as to how such ideas were once acceptable.

[murielm99]

4. Clean up the language a bit and write them a letter.

They might print it.

They actually printed a letter from me once. I should say they printed an excerpt from a letter I sent them. I tried to keep it short, but I guess it was not short enough for them.

[readmoreoften]

10. I think I will. Thanks for the idea. /nt

[theHandpuppet]

5. The Times version of "Get over it!"

i wonder how the NGLTF will take the Times using their statistics to actually dismiss hate crimes against GLBT kids.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. Sounds like "John Cloud" -who did the Ann Coulter Cover Love-in- is a known Asshole.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200504200008

You're right. Right Wing tripe, pure and simple- hate crime laws "criminalize thoughts" :eyes:

[Initech]

7. Heartless bastards.

I'm glad I canceled my subscription a long time ago.

[Janice325]

9. Well golly gee whiz!

:sarcasm:
"only 18% of gay and transgender students said they had ever been assaulted because of their sexual orientation" That's almost one in five!
How many students are actually going to admit that they are gay or transgender???
Sheesh...I'm glad I don't read Time.

[Skittles]

11. 18% is a LOT

and probably nowhere NEAR the REAL figure

[Hekate]

12. Please rewrite a bit, print this out and send it to TIME mag...

You've written a heartfelt and intelligent response, and it deserves a wider audience.

Hekate

[LostinVA]

18. I totally agree --- but Time won't print

But, the Advocate will. Send it in to them, RMO.

[Hekate]

21. TIME needs to hear from their readers, regardless. They may not print it, but they will notice if...

...enough people write to them.

Hekate

[NMMNG]

13. More of the same RW bullshit

Since when is it acceptable for 18% of students to be assaulted for any reason, let alone just for who they are? Add the other 16% who had been harassed but not assaulted and that means nearly 35% of LGBT students who've been made to feel unsafe at school. That's simply not excusable.

F*ck Time Magazine.

[readmoreoften]

14. But 22% of the 18% said their assaults weren't bad enough to be reported, Buffy!

22% of the 18% just fell of the swing because they're so clumsy. Of course, what that means is that 78% of the assaults were so bad that it was necessary to seek help from officials. I bet Lawrence King didn't 'report' it when they 'accosted him about his sexuality' two days before he was shot.

Maybe he didn't think it was necessary either. Or maybe he was too afraid to talk.

[NMMNG]

15. I bet the asshat wouldn't be downplaying it if it were assaults on

"persecuted Christians". You know, where their inability to force everyone in the school to say Christian prayers is an attack on them. :sarcasm:

[mmonk]

16. Beat his ass up.

Tell him he is part of a group that gets beat up less than that.

[LostinVA]

17. Sickening

Then, combine that with someone on here, who thinks racial and homophobic epithets are okay for kids to say.

[Psyop Samurai]

19. The "article" is a travesty. Published under the heading of "Viewpoint"...

...it is Time's only coverage of the crime.

This is why I don't bother with any of the propaganda organs, and I feel dirty for having gone there. On the same page are links to "related articles", including "Can Arab Preppies Save the Middle East?" and "Should Schools Fingerprint Your Kids?".

:puke:

They are zombie killers. And they don't just want LGBT people dead, but are happy for any convenient target.

[knight_of_the_star]

20. That's 18% too many

Color me surprised that Time misses the point.

[dsc]

22. I sent off a letter and hope it acutally gets read.

[yardwork]

23. Time magazine has no decency.

[hulklogan]

24. John Cloud is a pathetic supporter of the ex-gay movement

There is another article (a cover story, no less!) on the TIME website where he talks about how much fun queer teens are having at the ex-gay PFOX rollerskating nights. And how they're so excited to be part of a movement where the leaders are young and cute and wear t-shirts~!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1112856,00.html

I let TIME know in plain language exactly how I felt about this article. I can't believe they call the killer a "sweet-faced boy" when poor Lawrence King doesn't even have a face now that it was blown off by the murderer! TIME = bastards.

[Richard Steele]

25. Disgusting through and through. Grrrecommended.