Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Navigation |
"The Advocate"'s take on Lawrence King's murder
While nothing can bring gay teen Lawrence “Larry” King back to life, his murder at the hands of a fellow junior high student brought to light the mostly ignored subject of the violent bullying often endured by kids who don’t fit in at school. Given that gender expression and sexual orientation were key elements that made Larry different from his peers, it makes perfect sense for The Advocate to address the story at length, which it does in its April 8 cover story by Neal Broverman, "Who’s to Blame?” What at first seems like a broad rhetorical question on the cover unfortunately takes a literal turn as the writer searches high and low for scapegoats other than Larry's murderer, including the group home where Larry lived, LGBT advocates, “society,” and even Larry himself. Casa Pacifica, the group home for abused, neglected, and emotionally troubled children where Larry lived, is blamed for somehow being a safe haven where he was “encouraged to dress as he pleased and live as the person he wanted to be.” Broverman states that ”(i)t may be beyond the capacity of kids to reconcile a tolerant atmosphere like Casa Pacifica with the xenophobic, conformist nature of school.” LGBT advocates, particularly the National Center for Lesbian Rights, are also blamed for their “Know Your Rights Guide” and “Queer and Trans Youth in California Foster Care Have Rights!” pamphlet, provided to all LGBT children at the Larry’s foster care facility. The author highlights many of these rights, like safe bathrooms and “the right for kids to wear clothes and hairstyles that fit their gender identity.”
These rights, and even “an illustration of a teenager in overalls and high heels” (pictured above) in one of the guides, are presented as dangerous freedoms taken “to heart in the last weeks of (Larry’s) life.” Does anyone believe that an illustration and exposure to legal rights are responsible for Larry’s death? Broverman also comes across as empathetic to Larry’s killer, Brandon McInerney, as children like him “are products of their society, one that simply does not know what to do about a boy in heels,” and further states that “(t)he fact that King, who looked and acted ‘feminine,’ (and) could be as tough as a typical boy must have confounded and infuriated his enemies.” In this blame game, Larry actually is presented as the tormentor who not only wore heels but would “go chase bullies.” The author refers to Larry as being “bold” about a crush that King developed on his killer, for which King took “action in his typical brazen manner – he let people know, including McInerney.” Broverman obviously put a great deal of time and effort in painting a much broader picture of who Larry was, who his killer is, and the environments in which they were reared. Simply focusing on these elements could have yielded a great investigative article that elevated the level of discussion beyond a blame game. Yet Broverman seems to give Larry’s murderer a pass because of the powerful forces of this society, and feels Larry should have known better than to fight them. Would Larry be alive today if he were less bold? If his foster home had been less encouraging? If he had not been presented with legal his rights as a foster child? What do you think about this story and The Advocate’s take on it? For your own reference, here is a link to a letter signed by numerous individuals and organizations telling The Advocate how wrong they got this story. Submitted by on Tue, 2008-04-08 09:11. |
User login Recent comments
Recent blog posts
New forum topicsPut AfterElton.com headlines on your site/blog: |
that's fine.
i find everything about this "blame" thing to be so wrong. it really disturbs me and saddens me.I said it once and i'll say it again.....everyone has some sort of fear/prejudice about what they are not familiar with....but at the same time, there are those who can accept it and go on with their day....and then there are those who are most likely surrounded by foul mouthed asshats who spew hate every other second.you know what? ok, we're all to blame. I am to blame. every single person in the history of humankind is to blame then for every single death that involves hate.
everyone who has fought for equality and freedom to express themselves.....yep, all to blame.
I don't want to be the cause of anymore pain for people, so i'm just gonna go back to being all confused about who i am and all that other good stuff.
When it comes ot children,
When it comes ot children, personally, I treat hate crimes different to when adults are involved. Children don't have the same understanding that adults(should)have. something different form the norm really scares them, not just scare them for a second but it could have a huge impact on their entire life and really makes them scared of something for the rest of their life. I am not defending Brandon McInerney at all. Of course what he did is wrong and should be tried as a child and punished accordingly. But he truly is a prodect of his parents/family/friends/environment. 99% of people, those who aren't murderers/insane, are not born with hate. We are taught to hate things/people that are different so I truly blame Brandon McInerney's parents, teachers and family for not teaching him to accept people that are different. In the end I would like to see the kid to get help on the problem and not have to be shoved into jail for the rest of his teenage life because he will only come out somehting much, much worse.
People focus!!!! Forget blame and hate crimes
Sorry, but I think that you are missing the boat talking about hate crimes at all. I dont blame you as the little coverage that this has received has focused on an element that would AT MOST only add 2 to 3 years to whatever the sentence is.
To focus on hate crime or blaming others only takes away from the fact that a kid felt entitled to kill another kid because he was different. Like The Advocate, you can play the blame game too as you focus on the killers teachers, parents, and family but I think that it's so wrong as no one could have prevented this tragedy and to do so takes away from the bravery shown by Larry as I am not sure how much people would be worrying about him if he had killed any of his bullies.
I don't think that anyone believes that Brandon will come out a better guy when he comes out of jail as the criminal system is a mess, but let's mourn Larry and all the kids who get bullied because they are different as they deserve love not bullets. Bullies and murderers come from all walks of life. Let's not play the blame game here too.
It seems to me...
...that the information about acceptance given to Lawerence King and other kids in similar situations simply should not stop at their doorstep. OF COURSE these kids should be told that it's okay to be true to yourself. But, it's the other kids, straight non-questioning kids that need to be given this information at the same time. This should be part of the Life Planning classes in all schools. (or whatever the American version of that is) If the killer had been taught this in a real and meaningful way so that he understood and believed it, the same way LK did, then maybe he wouldn't have been so threatened by LK that he committed murder.
Kids have very maleable, impressionable minds. If you give them all of the information, teach them to think and feel, they have an amazing capacity to grow up well adjusted and intelligent. If all they are exposed to is vitriolic bigoted viewpoints at home, then that's how they treat the world.
I say we take the warning labels off everything and let nature take it's course.
Did you read the article in The Adocate?
If not, I'd recommend that all who have an opinion do.
We all wish that we had great parents and lived in caring homes, but many of us did not. Some of us were beaten, kicked out of our homes, told we were worthless because we were "different." We still are and not just for being gay. Not just at home but by society as a whole. Does that give any of us license to murder? Most of us have not and in fact learn a little empathy along the way.
I am shocked by comments that to me suggest that some here may knowingly be playing the blaming game. Even the best of parenting can go so far. Personal accountability or the fear of jail usually keep most in line. More must be done by all, but no one is to blame but the killer himself.
DClikesAE, I did not intend...
...to suggest the killer is not to blame for this horrific crime. But, as is my understanding, the killer was a CHILD himself. Unless he was a sociopathic person that would have gone on to continue to kill until he was caught, I can only surmise that he was influenced by his environment. That environment is first and foremost the home, then the community he grew up in, then the schools he attended. Obviously, not every child raised in a rabidly homophobic environment grows up to committ murder, just like not every person that is abused as a child grows up to be an abuser. But, it sure as hell makes it more likely. I don't know if this child was raised in that kind of environment but he sure got the idea that to be hit on by a gay kid was much worse than committing murder. Where would any kid get that idea?
The article in the Advocate is stupid for implying that the GLBT community is to blame for LK's murder, if that's what they were doing and that seems to be what some of the posters here think. I was simply trying to point out that children are the most impressionable members of society, and most killers are created in childhood. Who the heck is to blame for that?
And BTW, yes, I did read the article.
I say we take the warning labels off everything and let nature take it's course.
The Blame Game.
As I've noted before on this blog, I think the Advocate's take on this was disgusting (kind of a "you're to blame for the rape because you encouraged your friend to wear her new mini-skirt" kind of story). They could have covered this story in so many ways, and this is how they chose to do it? And this is the cover they want staring out at audiences from the newstands at Barnes and Noble? The same issue also featured a fawning editorial about what a great president John McCain would make, without mentioning once McCain's recent embrace of major antigay figures like Rev. Hagee-- while elsewhere in that issue the Advocate gives us a long excerpt from a book where the author, quote, "argues the [same-sex] marriage movement needs to be taken down a peg-- and fast."
So I ask, again, why does the most prominent gay and lesbian magazine in America churn out an issue like this that features stories that might as well have come from Pat Buchanan's The American Conservative mag? The Advocate's been increasingly tipping conservative for a while now, but when they start to buy into common anti-gay rhetoric so much so that it ends up on the cover, while meanwhile covering up important facets of stories (like Mccain and Hagee), they've moved beyond the pale. If you ask me, the letter all those gay and lesbian groups sent to the Advocate criticizing this cover story were, if anything, too damn nice.
If we're going to play the game of handing out blame, might I suggest that by running with a cover that's practically a wet dream for right wing talk radio and groups like Focus on the Family, the Advocate itself may well be to blame for slanted and dangerous conceptions of the gay and lesbian community? It sure sounds a lot more destructive than a pamphlet arguing that gay and lesbain kids should "know their rights" and have "safe bathrooms."
........
"So I ask, again, why does the most prominent gay and lesbian magazine in America churn out an issue like this that features stories that might as well have come from Pat Buchanan's The American Conservative mag?"
seriously. someone was on major crack. That's the only answer i can think of. Or maybe someone there felt they themselves (the writer) were to blame for a hate crime. who knows?
I wonder...maybe 'The Advocate' should no longer be existent. after all, it is a gay/lesbian magazine and oh yeah.....they may want to prevent future killings. I actually don't read the magazine and I'm starting to be glad of that fact.
Put away the conservative strawmen
What coverage this killing did get on regional conservative radio wasn't anything like you suggested. It focused on killing being wrong, whatever the wrong-headed reasoning the perpetrator used as justification.
It is worth asking the question whether the encouragement to "express yourself," while failing to ensure a reasonably safe environment to do so, painted a bulls eye on Lawrence King.
McCain's "embrace" is debatable. Reading over at Huffington Post, I see he accepted an endorsement yet repudiated a number of positions taken by Rev Hagge such as his anti-Catholicism. The campaign emphasized it should not be taken as an endorsement by McCain of the full litany of Hagge's views. I don't see this nonsense as any different than trying to paint Obama with the stench of his own anti-gay reverend James T. Meeks, someone he's taken on the campaign trail with him.
This isn't on the same level as Obamas close personal relationship with the racist demagogue Rev. Wright.
McCain personally sought out
The Liberal Media Myth
Of course. Contrary to common conservative rants, America's predominantly corporate run media frequently favors the Right. This is main reason why conservatives give the flase impression of being a united movement while liberals are often depicted as fragmented and disorganized.
A great many Protestant Evangelicals for example are rabidly anti-Catholic and many routinely air anti-Semitic views as well. Attention is rarely drawn to this. Likewise, a lot of Catholic positions are often hushed for good or ill.
It used to drive me nuts because my state used to have Rick Santorum as one of our senators. Whenever he went off on one of his homophobic tangents he justified himself by arguing that he was simply toeing the line set down by the Catholic Church, him being a devout member. But nobody ever seemed to question him on why he was so supportive of Bush's Iraq war when the Vatican had openly taken a stance against it.
Yet at the same time people in the media were constantly pointing out the ways John Kerry's views digressed from the official Vatican line.
Whenever a liberal is out of sync with their religion that fact is frequently mentioned by commentators. But when conservatives are in the same situation nobody dares mention it.
The double-standard is there no matter what they say.
The Advocate
I stopped getting The Advocate last year for a couple reasons. One, they had become irrelavent to me. By the time the issue arrived, I'd already read about everything in much more detail online (usually here on AfterElton.com or 365gay.com) or in some cases, actually written about it. It was old news. But more importantly, I found I increasingly disagreed with many of the viewpoints in the magazine. I think especially with the newest editor, it really went downhill. For a magazine that was supposed to be an "advocate" for gay rights, it really does seem to be self-loathing these days.
I'm floored by the article's suggestion that we should stop teaching kids to understand themselves and be proud of who they are. We should be working with every ounce of our beings to change the world into a more accepting place, not shoving our kids back into the closet. I'm really disgusted and disappointed in The Advocate, and that's saying a lot considering how low my expectations are these days.
Missed the pride bashing
I'm floored by the article's suggestion that we should stop teaching kids to understand themselves and be proud of who they are.
Pleas quote that from the article. Because I just read the article and wiped the tears from my eyes and I don't want to read it again, I don't recall reading a single sentiment that suggested that we should stop teaching GLBT kids to be proud.
A journalistic hate crime by The Advocate.
Nukely: I have not had a chance to add to the discussion at all as it's been a tough week for my family; however, I wanted to give you at least one quote to support Josh's observation.
While it may be too painful for you to read it again (it really breaks my heart as it's not just about Larry), this is one of the few articles in which even strong/out of context quotes don't reflect that heightened tone that starts and ends with a clear message that we should all know that this world is homophobic and hateful. As such, any of us who chose to be out and proud, especially kids, should know that death could be around the corner. The cover story sets up its intent from the onset:
"Mixed Messages. Weeks before he was brazenly killed by his teenage crush, 15-year-old Lawrence King was encouraged to be himself. Did that lesson help send him to his grave?"
To me, the author's conclusion to me has "yes" written all over it:
"Guided by a welcoming support system at the group home where he lived, the teenager was encouraged to dress as he pleased and live as the person he wanted to be. What King and others didn’t recognize was that this encouragement—and his response to it—placed him on a collision course with a culture that found him repulsive."
My interpretation? An unqualified guilty verdict against those who encouraged him as they were somehow clueless about how society perceives kids like Larry. The author did not even frame his blame in the conditional. He has no basis for his irresponsible blaming.
"As wonderful as this encouragement sounds, did it put Larry in harm’s way by sending him out in a world not ready for him? It may be beyond the capacity of kids to reconcile a tolerant atmosphere like Casa Pacifica with the xenophobic, conformist nature of school. Children like Brandon McInerney are products of their society, one that simply does not know what to do with a boy in heels."
My interpretation? Again, don't go building up the ego of LGBT kids unless they keep it in the closet as this society does not know what to do with freaks like them.
"The fact that King, who looked and acted 'feminine,' could be as tough as a typical boy must have confounded and infuriated his enemies. Says Weber-Hernandez: 'He’d go chase bullies.'"
My interpretation? Larry was in a pickle as he did not simply take the bullying like most kids. He must have "confounded and infuriatied his enemies." Call me a cynic, but the public defender who defends Brandon might save himself lots of time by using this article and it's author to help him present his opening and closing statements as to why his client did exactly as expected by putting 2 bullets into Larry's head.
Instead of focusing on the amazing work that so many are doing with limited resources or asking how to build on documented successes, it irresponsibly jumps down the throat of do-gooders like Casa Pacifica and the National Center for Lesbian Rights for somehow pushing an innocent child into shark-infested waters.
This murder is a tragedy and there is no getting around it. I even understand the compassion that many have for Brandon, but where is the author's true compassion for Larry? Is resorting to even blaming Larry for his own death compassionate? While it will not bring Larry back, I have contacted the author to give him a chance to explain some of the questions that so many have about his article.
Coming attractions: Guillermo's Cultural Guillotine
http://springintoaction.typepad.com/cultural_guillotine/
Kids need to be taught how to love
I thought the article was saying that it's okay to be ourselves, but there are environments where it might be better to hide the fact that you're gay. There are people I won't tell my orientation to unless they ask.
You need to learn to defend yourself as a kid. Especially if you're a boy who wears high heels and make up in middle school. From the accounts, it seems like Lawarence did defend himself, he chased the MFs down, something I did in middle school, too. I was also taught to box, in case I caught them. But you can't teach a kid to defend a bullet. And no one deserves one and I didn't think that's what the author was trying to say.
I thought the article was a big question. I survived middle school and dogged alot of fists by trying my best to be straight, as much as that sucked. Should we teach a kid to be out and proud and then let him go into that same hostile environment, which for most of us ends in 3 years but ended sooner for Lawrence? I think that's a valid question even if it brings up some sucky conclusions.
And we still don't know why! So, you're right. Assuming that lawrences effeminacy or dress or behavior had anything to do with it, is pure speculation. I believe it will come down to something as simple as one kid who didn't know the proper way to express his love and another kid who didn't know the proper way to accept or reject it. We don't teach them that. But they sure know how to use guns.
America's Violent Culture
The problem is that we live in a culture that exalts violence. Studies have repeatedly shown (one is mentioned on this site) that parents would prefer their children be exposed to images of violence in the media rather than images of sexuality. Luke and Noah kissing is considered too risque for ATWT but murder is not.
How often are children subliminally or openly told that something that seems threatening should be killed?
So long as our culture works that way this sort of stuff is going to happen.
Gee, let's see. The boy was
solutions are needed
Kids need to be taught how to stand up to bullies. They should not be told to simply not stand up to bullies. It is possible to educate adults in the workplace on how to deal with bullies, how to recognize potentially dangerous people, and how to respond to such people. I am sure it is possible to similarly educate kids in school. Instead of placing blame, The Advocate should have been brainstorming solutions.
As a side note, The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker is an excellent read. Self defence classes are a good idea for anybody who thinks they might be targetted, or even anybody who thinks they won't be targetted. Even big tough guys get mugged sometimes. But, besides that, it's also important to develop a judgement about which situations are safe, which are dangerous, and how to avoid dangerous situations. The Gift of Fear talks about that.
Kids need to be taught how to NOT be bullies....
I still say that teaching kids how to stand up to bullies is missing the point. Standing back and looking at the big picture and teaching kids how to not be bullies in the first place is the only real answer. Psionycx is right that on tv, movies and games, violence is just fine but sexuality is a big taboo. This is totally backwards to the way it should be. Nukely is right on, as well. Kids need to be taught how to accept or reject someone's advances in a respectful and reasonable way, just as kids should be taught what is an acceptable way to let someone know you are attracted to them.
Very little time is spent actually teaching kids anything. They learn by observation, and guess what they see the most.
I say we take the warning labels off everything and let nature take it's course.
Guillermo, another great unsentimental post!
From one DCer to another. Great work and not just because I agree on how lousy the article was. I like how Guillermo sees through the fog. Why do I only see him mostly writing about that soap here? Too much talent to waste on that. Don't bash me, just my opinion.
Why is there no link to The Advocate article? The author had a cheesy line about all the complicit parties who helped Brandon pulled that trigger. I wonder if the author even cared about how his article would be perceived by Larry if he were still alive? Another bully, but one pretending to be a friend.
Please more of these stories as it can open eyes to those who have been misinformed or not informed at all. The Advocate is not always this lousy and I saw some promising material until this issue. This is shameful. When is Guillermo, going to tackle Obama and Clinton's recent media apperances? I can't wait to come back to AE for that one.
They were right... Unintentionally
Personally, I think the Advocate got it right, but I don't think that they intended to. The point that they were trying to make is that Lawrence King fell victim to a system that told him to accept himself, and simultaneously didn't teach others to accept him. This friction is what caused the outburst.
Teenagers, especially teenage boys, are homophobic by definition. Tolerance is a rather nuanced position, and it is one that has to be publicly guided by administrators. They needed that assembly, and they needed it badly.
In the end, there's no one to blame but the murderer. Was Lawrence foolish, and perhaps too bold in revealing and playing up his crush on a popular boy? Of course, but he was 13 -- youthful folly isn't punishable by death. Could the school have done more? Definitely.
There are many explanations, but in the end, the blame lies with the shooter, and we should spend our time trying to make sure that we give young men strategies to deal with their frustrations before they explode, rather than prosecuting them afterwards.
Sorry, but I need to correct you...
"Personally, I think the Advocate got it right, but I don't think that they intended to. The point that they were trying to make is that Lawrence King fell victim to a system that told him to accept himself, and simultaneously didn't teach others to accept him. This friction is what caused the outburst".
Please don't use the word "outburst" to describe cold blooded murder. An "outburst" is associated with "elevated" or "escalated" anger...when someone is mad or angry. I believe the more appropriate word for this would be "rage".
"In the end, there's no one to blame but the murderer".
I'm sorry, but I disagree. The blame ALSO lies with those who helped raise this child to believe that it's totally acceptable to kill another person simply because they're gay regardless of age. Why must people continue to have and raise children if they don't bother to take proper care in how their child conducts him/herself? I just don't get it.
"There are many explanations, but in the end, the blame lies with the shooter"
You stated in your opening that Lawrence King fell victim to a system that told him to accept himself and simultaneously didn't teach others to accept him. Those people who were taught not to accept him INCLUDES those who helped raise Brandon, don't you get it? Peace :)
Regards,
dgd417
Actually, you know what?
Actually, you know what? You're right. And I'm serious. If, as I said, Lawrence was a victim of the system, then the system is to blame, not just the kid who killed him. Otherwise, I'm violating my own standard. I still say the shooter made a choice, but that no one helped him to see that murdering a classmate was a poor form of conflict resolution is what made that choice possible.
Thanks for keeping me on my toes.
Thanks Cameronj...
for understanding and agreeing with my post. I just wanted to be clear that I actually understood and agreed with you too. The truth is that this murder was so tragic and so shocking to us all because of the ages of the parties involved that it threw us all for a loop. Perhaps there are several ways we could look at this horrible crime...who knows. That's what our opinions are for. I think it fair to say that we're all in a state of shock, disbelief and confusion. As I look back at my reply, I realize that there may have been some kind of "smart-alecky" tone to it and that was not my intention at all and I apologize for that. The bottom line is that this was a senseless crime and ulitmately we are all on the same side on this one. It was very sad and tragic, and it should never have happened regardless of one's age or even one's sexuality for that matter. Murder is murder any way you look at it. I think that we can both agree to agree right? LOL Peace :)
Regards,
dgd417
The groups...
...that fingers are being pointed at here are saving lives, and creating safe spaces - far more than making poor judgement calls. This kind of assessment of how the media (both gay & straight media) covers gay issues and - in this case - tragedies, is so important; because the media is such a big part of how America forms their opinions of their fellow gay citizens. Hope the Advocate soon highlights the good these groups do as well.
Excellent insights. Springintoaction!
2008 and Gay - Why You're At Risk
Thanks Guillermo for pointing out the errors not just with the Advocate's article (yes I read it and the response of many NGOs) but also how they reported it. You have fallen into a dreadful position: reporting on the press. And I'm ashamed to admit it's the gay press and we can't keep our house in order. It's part of larger problem though and I'm glad you did what you did.
Sure..at my gym in Boston the 20 something gay kids and straight trainers weave in and out straight and gay life seemlessly because to them there really is no difference. But something is wrong...HIV transmission spiked 31% in the under 30 crowd in NYC and serconversion is just reported at its highest in DC. What the hell happened with those cheerleaders in Florida? 3 months ago, a sweet kid got stabbed to death outside a gay bar (it was officially a hate crime) and no press. Have you seen the new CDC HIV statistics?
My point is that the gay community, in its perfect and imperfet ways, protected so many of us from the ethical high road of the rest of america where 1 in 100 adults is incarcerated for drug related charges. I don't have any gay friends fascinted with Britney. Political America is obsessed with the bedroom and our community has told them to elequently fuck off - this has provided an immense amount of health benefit to us. But this sense of a need to collaborate is clearly deteriating - no Halloween Parade in the Castro this year. This SAD story would have never passed editorial review 5 years ago. As someone who works in emergency medicine I can tell you the killer can not be diagnosoed personality disorder until he is 18 - the DSM does not allow for that. So then what? But it does seem the social, protective fabric which brought us so much is straining and fraying.
We are all challenged to act locally more than ever. Kudos again Guillermo...its regrettable you had to spring into action.
Would you die for the cause?
The picture painted in the Advocate should be familiar. An effeminate gay boy is rejected by his family, school and community. But he stood up for himself; that's something the people around him may never forget, like one of the students suggests in her statement that even the bullies cried at his wake. But he didn't deserve to be a martyr, and that's why I weep when I read about him, he was too young to die for a cause.
The question for me is: how do we get kids to stop killing each other, regardless? What happened with Columbine and seems to happen now, is that everyone is afraid to place blame. Because nobody is willing to stand up and take any part of the blame. I commend Kate Kendell for admitting that "perhaps there needed to be greater attention to the climate at school and making him aware of maybe needing to, as tragic as it would be, cover to some degree in order to protect himself" While I'm not sure he needed to cover, nor do I know that what he did was that inappropriate, I do have to say a butch girl who wears work boots and a crew cut (pictured in the flyer) is treated different than a feme boy who uses an eyebrow pencil and wears high-healed beetle boots. I expect they're working on the project right now.
I've worked on the graphics and even the language for these types of hand-outs, like the one you showed, and I find they're often lacking. And kid's may take these things literally. At best These information leaflets can bring you closer to a person or place where you will get detailed information and understanding. What bugs me is the leaflet that tries to be a buzz word or sort of 10 Commandments, which can misdirect the reader From finding their own truth, that's what I think Broverman was trying to address.
When the gay community are the people authoring these pieces of information, and placing that info in the schools, well they need to stand up to the criticism like everyone else. That best crit may come from a brother or sister. I can't blame Broverman for being critical.
I am most grieved by Broverman's final statement "It’s a striking fact that the society now prosecuting Brandon McInerney as an adult is the same one that failed both him and Lawrence King as children."
.
The legal circus on the Lawrence King murder has begun
For those who may be following this story, you may already know that many, including leading LGBT rights groups don't want Larry's killer tried as an adult. I agree in principle, and hope that all will disregard the blame game and keep trying to do the best job they can given the resources available.
A couple of weeks ago, I made a flip remark indicating that the public defender assigned to this case could save himself much time by using The Advocate's article as an integral part of his defense. Sunday's Ventura County Star quotes William Quest, Brandon McInerney's defense attorney as having the the following during an interview:
"Students have said they witnessed confrontations between King and McInerney in the weeks or days before the shooting, including King's teasing McInerney and telling him that he liked him.
McInerney perceived King's treatment as harassment, Quest said. Quest, however, declined to discuss any specific confrontations or issues between the boys. He also declined to say if McInerney ever sought help from an adult to deal with the issue.
Quest said he believes school administrators supported one student expressing himself and his sexuality — King — and ignored how it affected other kids, despite complaints. Cross-dressing isn't a normal thing in adult environments, he said, yet 12-, 13- and 14-year-olds were expected to just accept it and go on."
I understand that we all deserve the very best defense as it's all part of a process, but nothing about this process will bring Larry back to respond to all the accusations against him. Larry's bully is now the harrassed party and the school framed as giving Larry some type of preferenial treatment by allowing him to run around looking like something not "normal."
I know that having a defense lawyer say any of this does not make it true, but I just hope that this matter is resolved quickly and that other voices join in the public dialogue so that all kids who are different are not considered fair game for target practice not matter how society or individuals feel about differences.
Coming attractions: Guillermo's Cultural Guillotine
http://springintoaction.typepad.com/cultural_guillotine/