Need A Little Voting Help…?

It’s almost time to go vote again. I probably don’t have to say that - considering the amount of coverage political issues have gotten on the evening news … not to mention all those multiple campaign ads that are showing up on just about every commercial break that’re starting to make me nauseous because they aren’t about how good their candidates are, but rather about how bad their opponents are. Why is it that nobody wants to talk about where they stand on the issues, but rather how their opponents have been wrong in the past? And why is it that nobody is even remotely willing to tell the full story?

And it’s not just the TV Campaign Ads either - it’s blogs … tv news casts … newspaper articles …

So, it’s rare when something comes along that actually helps you to understand the issues … when something comes along and tells you where to vote and about the issues you’re really voting about … and occasionally, those things comes from some unexpected places.

Google Earth is one of those places. In case you didn’t know - Google Earth is a program very similar to the Google Local or Google Maps website - although it contains many more features. One feature of Google Earth are various layers that can appear or disappear. You can put a layer up with street names … you can put a layer up to tell you where parks are, or hotels, or restaurants, or libraries, amongst a number of other things.

And then there’s the Congressional Districts layer. It helps map out the various congressional districts - and even contains links to more information about who is running in each of the congressional districts and more information about what’s going on.

Methinks it’s definitely worth checking out…

2005 Hate Crime Statistics

The Federal Bureau of Investigations has recently released the 2005 Hate Crimes Statistics. Already, there have been quite a few blog posts stating things like how gays are the third largest hate crime group. I have also seen a few posts which question that finding.

One important thing to keep in mind is that these statistics include the number of reported hate crimes. The statistic that gays are the third largest hate crime group sounds like an impressive statistic. But, how accurate is this? There may be much room for potential errors.

One important fact to keep in mind is that many states do not allow crimes based on sexual orientation to be legally considered (or reported as) hate crimes. If identical crimes were perpetrated in two locations where one was allowed to be considered a hate crime while the other legally can’t - how will this effect the statistics?

A similar thing to keep in mind is that gays and lesbians often do not report crimes against them out of fear from being outed, facing rejection from friends, family, or co-workers, amongst a number of other reasons as well. If many gays and lesbians try to suppress knowledge of their crimes, how will this effect the statistics?

In some ways, there are a lot of similarities between hate crimes based on sexual orientation and hate crimes based on other factors, such as religion, race, or national origin. However, in a lot of ways they are very different. For example, hate crimes are often so emotionally charged, the degree of violence involved with assaults is often much greater than that of a simple assault. Race, National Origin, or Sexual Orientation tends to have little impact on the degree of violence.

Gays and lesbians are sometimes referred to as an invisible minority group because unlike groups of people that can be identified by the color of their skin or other racial features, it’s often less obvious who is gay or who is not. There have also been a number of reported crimes against heterosexuals who were victimized because someone perceived them to be gay - and often these crimes go unreported or downplayed.

There are also differences in the way society, in general, tends to respond to crimes against various different groups. When one encounters anti-Jewish graffiti, the response tends to often be outrage. Anti-gay graffiti, if it gets a reaction, is likely to be much different.  Let me ask you? How would you respond if you saw the word “nigger” spray-painted on the back of someone’s car? How would you respond if you saw the word “faggot” spray painted on the back of someone’s car? Any difference? (I hope I did not offend anyone by my use of the “n” and “f” words.)
Another interesting factor deals with the number of agencies that report data. For example, the State of Alabama (a state with 32 agencies that report hate crimes) did not report a single hate crime. Why? Are we supposed to believe that a state with a history of racial tension did not have a single hate crime in all of 2005? Alabama reported 19,678 cases of violent crime, 374 murders or non-negligent manslaughters, 1,564 rapes, and 11,293 aggravated assaults. But, not a single hate crime?

Still, this does not undermine the importance of finding these statistics. That was not my intention. It is my firm belief that it doesn’t matter which group comes in first, second, or third place … hate crimes - no matter who commits them against whom - are completely and totally unacceptable. Does it really matter all that much which group got hit hardest?

A Message to F. Rottles

This is a public message to one of my frequent commenters, F. Rottles. Your attempts to provoke me into some sort of flame war have, thus far, gone unanswered for somewhat personal reasons. That time is now over.

You left me a comment when I stated that the myth that homosexuals are child molesters has long since been debunked asking me to clarify. Hopefully I can shed some light on this.

First of all is common logic. “All homosexuals molest children” is a very silly statement and is not even worthy of a response. The idea is preposterous.

Over the past couple of decades many groups have “debunked” many of the old stereotypes that gay men all become serial killers, molest children, etc… Those groups include: The American Psychological Association, The American Medical Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, The American Nurses Association, The American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychiatric Nurses Association, The Centers for Disease Control, The National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors, The National Association of Social Workers, The National Board of Medical Examiners, The National Health Counsel, The Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry, The Academy of Behavioral Profiling, The American Academy of Forensic Science, The American Board of Forensic Psychiatry, The American Psychoanalytic Association, The American Forensic Association… Just to name a few.

It’s not just medical or scientific groups as well. This notion has also been rejected by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, The FBI Academy, The National Colition of Anti-Violence Projects, The American Bar Association, Crimestoppers, The ACLU … again, just to name a few.

In fact, the only groups I have found that have supported this idea include groups such as The Family Research Counsel, which has been funded and supported almost entirely by Evangelical organizations, churches, and politicians - and are therefore in more of a position to appease their supporters than to follow actual scientific procedures.

Finally, I have one last topic to comment on…

Part of the reason I did not respond to your comments until now was because it was hard to take you seriously. The presentations of fact and opinion should not be confused. Speaking of things which you obviously know nothing (such as my reasons for not responding) comes out loud and clear.

It is also hard to take people seriously who hide behind being anonymous. Saying you are “F. Rottles” says nothing about yourself.

Another example of why it was hard to take you seriously was when you said things like (as your last comment to me) ” note she has offered no links”… She? You refer to me correctly once as he, and then later incorrectly a few lines later as she. With all the pictures of myself on my blog … with the times I have identified myself as a gay man … how could there be any doubt of my gender. Or, is this just one more example of you now knowing what you are talking about?

Homosexuality and Pedophilia (And Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla)

It figures on the very day I post about Homosexuality and Pedophilia, A friend of mine alerts me to a news article about Mark Foley.

There are so many issues here, I don’t know where to start.

In the past 24 hours, there have been many news articles written about the Republican Congressman (Florida) Mark Foley. Many of those articles called Mark Foley a pedophile. He is not. But, I suppose to answer that question, one must look at the definition of Pedophilia.

Pedophilia has been defined by Law Enforcement as well as the Medical and Psychological field as a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. There is no cut off age for pedophilia interest, as puberty can hit different children at different ages. Having an attraction to young, post-pubescent children is what is called Ephebophilia. Pederasty is an ephebophiliac attraction to young males, while attraction to postpubscent females is referred to as the “Lolita Syndrome” - a reference to the 1962 Stanley Kubrick film Lolita based on the novel by Vladimir Nabokov.

Legally, psychologically, and mentally, there are more differences between pedophilia and ephebophilia than there are similarities. However, there are many people and groups out there trying to blur the lines between the two, usually stating something along the lines of “sexual attraction to children is sexual attraction to children and it is bad, no matter what you call it.”

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with either pedophilia or ephebophilia. So, then why is it that we are more outraged when Congressman Mark Foley sends inappropriate text messages to a sixteen year old boy than we were when Mary Kay Laterno gets pregnant by her teenage lover and student? What about Sandra “Beth” Geisel? In fact, there have been quite a few female teachers getting caught in inappropriate relationships with their male students since Laterno. In fact, it almost seems like the world loves Laterno - we can’t stop talking about her, and did you see that movie they did on Lifetime? Or, did you see the episode of Law and Order: SVU that was ripped out of the Laterno Headlines?

So, why does Laterno get celebrity status while Mark Foley gets labeled a dangerous pedophile?

Another issue that was raised in several of the articles I read about Mark Foley was on the Republican response to learning about Foley’s indiscretions. The

One of my biggest questions is this: What if Mark Foley was a Democrat and not a Republican? Would they have sat on their asses for awhile doing nothing until the story finally went public, or would they have been there starting another round of the war they raise with the Democrats? And dare I mention anything like “Family Values”?