Homophobic attack on London bus - mod warning, please see OP

ohnonotgmail

blinding wrote: »

I hope we get to see all the ‘ Form “ of the attackers !

It will tell us a lot about them .

Would that make the attack less homophobic?

B0jangles

Accepting that this attack was homophobic in nature validates the idea that hate crimes are a real thing and that minorities do, in fact, experience challenges and setbacks that are also real and need to be addressed. This is why there is such a push to invalidate attacks like this.

If you remove the homophobia, if you claim it's just 'scumbags being scumbags, they'd do the same to anyone', you're claiming that the playing field is already level, that there is no need to do anything to address inequalities in society because those inequalities don't actually exist.

blinding

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Would that make the attack less homophobic?

If they had form for homophobic attacks :eek:

If they have form for General scumbaggery:eek:

If they have form for Hetrosexual attacks :eek:

Maybe they never done nutting ever:eek::eek::eek:

Nikki Sixx

B0jangles wrote: »

Accepting that this attack was homophobic in nature validates the idea that hate crimes are a real thing and that minorities do, in fact, experience challenges and setbacks that are also real and need to be addressed. This is why there is such a push to invalidate attacks like this.

If you remove the homophobia, if you claim it's just 'scumbags being scumbags, they'd do the same to anyone', you're claiming that the playing field is already level, that there is no need to do anything to address inequalities in society because those inequalities don't actually exist.

If it was a homophonic attack, how do you want governments or society to treat it differently to a normal attack?Should we come up with a scale that we use for sentencing, based on ethnicity, sexuality and how marginalized the person is? For example hitting a white person gets you 4 months in jail, hitting a black person gets you six and hitting a Jewish person/ Muslim gets you 6. Hitting a gay person who is also: a Jew, Muslim or black, carries the maximum sentence of 1 year in jail. What you are looking for isn’t equality, it’s preferential treatment based on being gay.

ohnonotgmail

blinding wrote: »

If they had form for homophobic attacks :eek:

If they have form for General scumbaggery:eek:

If they have form for Hetrosexual attacks :eek:

Maybe they never done nutting ever:eek::eek::eek:

Even if they only had form for general scumbaggery would that make THIS attack any less homophobic?

ohnonotgmail

Nikki Sixx wrote: »

If it was a homophonic attack, how do you want governments or society to treat it differently to a normal attack?Should we come up with a scale that we use for sentencing, based on ethnicity, sexuality and how marginalized the person is? For example hitting a white person gets you 4 months in jail, hitting a black person gets you six and hitting a Jewish person/ Muslim gets you 6. Hitting a gay person who is also: a Jew, Muslim or black, carries the maximum sentence of 1 year in jail. What you are looking for isn’t equality, it’s preferential treatment based on being gay.

They already treat them differently in the UK where this attack occurred. Crimes motivated by hate attract higher sentences.

Nikki Sixx

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

They already treat them differently in the UK where this attack occurred. Crimes motivated by hate attract higher sentences.

Great problem solved then? We have gay marriage, it’s not illegal to be gay any more and homosexuals can hold hands walking down the street. The leader of our country is gay. It’s illegal to discriminate against homosexuals in the workplace. Attacks on homosexuals carry heavier sentences. Where is all the inequality towards gay people? Is the biggest issue that maybe some of their own parents don’t fully accept their sexuality and not society as a whole?

ohnonotgmail

Nikki Sixx wrote: »

Great problem solved then? We have gay marriage, it’s not illegal to be gay any more and homosexuals can hold hands walking down the street. The leader of our country is gay. It’s illegal to discriminate against homosexuals in the workplace. Attacks on homosexuals carry heavier sentences. Where is all the inequality towards gay people? Is the biggest issue that maybe some of their own parents don’t fully accept their sexuality and not society as a whole?

Unfortunately making something illegal or giving it heavier sentences doesnt stop those things from happening. THe biggest issue is people like you who think we should stop fighting for our rights.

blinding

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Even if they only had form for general scumbaggery would that make THIS attack any less homophobic?

Just that they decided to diversify and throw in some Homophobia into their usual scumbagery .

Next time it might be Ginger Phobia . Small person Phobia etc etc

They may just be scumbags trying diversity .

I hope we get to hear about their form ..if they have form ( guess = they do )

Lets see .

ohnonotgmail

blinding wrote: »

Just that they decided to diversify and throw in some Homophobia into their usual scumbagery .

Next time it might be Ginger Phobia . Small person Phobia etc etc

They may just be scumbags trying diversity .

I hope we get to hear about their form ..if they have form ( guess = they do )

Lets see .

Their form is irrelevant.

blinding

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Their form is irrelevant.

If they have form for Homophobia ? Would that be relevant ?

ohnonotgmail

blinding wrote: »

If they have form for Homophobia ? Would that be relevant ?

No. The only thing that is relevant is whether this attack was homophobic.

blinding

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No. The only thing that is relevant is whether this attack was homophobic.

If they had form for Homophobia would that not point to Homophobia .

What if they are Homosexual Men ?

What if they had a long history of Scumbagery with no Homophobia ?

We need to know more .

Perhaps they were innocents attacked by two Lesbians ?

We need a Public Court Case to see what really happened ?

ohnonotgmail

blinding wrote: »

If they had form for Homophobia would that not point to Homophobia .

What if they are Homosexual Men ?

What if they had a long history of Scumbagery with no Homophobia ?

We need to know more .

Perhaps they were innocents attacked by two Lesbians ?

We need a Public Court Case to see what really happened ?

I'll leave you alone to your nonsensical ramblings.

batgoat

blinding wrote: »

Just that they decided to diversify and throw in some Homophobia into their usual scumbagery .

Next time it might be Ginger Phobia . Small person Phobia etc etc

They may just be scumbags trying diversity .

I hope we get to hear about their form ..if they have form ( guess = they do )

Lets see .

Ginger people have not had a long history of discrimination... Meanwhile the people most vocal about this attack not being homophobic seem to actively oppose hate crime legislation. Eg Kim

blinding

batgoat wrote: »

Ginger people have not had a long history of discrimination... Meanwhile the people most vocal about this attack not being homophobic seem to actively oppose hate crime legislation. Eg Kim

I am just nosey about the form of the perpetrators .

On the face of it it looks like Homophobia but this may have just been one of any reasons that scumbags would have used against anybody they saw as vulnerable .

What if their defence is ; We are just General Scumbags and would abuse / attack anybody vulnerable we felt like .

B0jangles

Nikki Sixx wrote: »

If it was a homophonic attack, how do you want governments or society to treat it differently to a normal attack?Should we come up with a scale that we use for sentencing, based on ethnicity, sexuality and how marginalized the person is? For example hitting a white person gets you 4 months in jail, hitting a black person gets you six and hitting a Jewish person/ Muslim gets you 6. Hitting a gay person who is also: a Jew, Muslim or black, carries the maximum sentence of 1 year in jail. What you are looking for isn’t equality, it’s preferential treatment based on being gay.

No, it's attempting to counteract existing prejudices against minorities, one of those minorities being gay people.

If I hit someone because they hit me first, that is obviously treated differently than if I simply hit them because I don't like their face.

Different circumstances are already treated differently based on the motivation for the crime. Why shouldn't the law recognise that some crimes are committed simply or primarily because of homophobia or racism or bigotry?

Counteracting prejudice requires many different tools - positive representation in the media and visibility in the community helps, along with punitive methods like hate crime legislation.

Annasopra

Nikki Sixx wrote: »

If it was a homophonic attack, how do you want governments or society to treat it differently to a normal attack?Should we come up with a scale that we use for sentencing, based on ethnicity, sexuality and how marginalized the person is? For example hitting a white person gets you 4 months in jail, hitting a black person gets you six and hitting a Jewish person/ Muslim gets you 6. Hitting a gay person who is also: a Jew, Muslim or black, carries the maximum sentence of 1 year in jail. What you are looking for isn’t equality, it’s preferential treatment based on being gay.

No. Its not because heterosexual do not get targeted because they are heterosexual therefore they are not at extra risk of being attacked.

Annasopra

blinding wrote: »

If they had form for Homophobia would that not point to Homophobia .

What if they are Homosexual Men ?

What if they had a long history of Scumbagery with no Homophobia ?

We need to know more .

Perhaps they were innocents attacked by two Lesbians ?

We need a Public Court Case to see what really happened ?

Whatabout whataboutery?

Sheridan81

Christy42 wrote: »

I mean the attackers focused on the gay part for there initial harassment so it seems likely that they were set off initially by the gay part. Balance of probability suggests homophobic attack.

They could have been harassed because they were women, because they were foreign, because they were gay, because they were easy targets or just because the boys felt like harassing someone and they were there. You have your opinion, I have mine, that's all.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Crimes motivated by hate attract higher sentences.

When someone is punching you in the face it's fair to say the crime is motivated by hate whether you're gay or not. 'Hate crime' is a silly category. Most, if not all, physical and/or life-endangering crimes involve hatred. Prejudice crime would be a sensible name.

B0jangles wrote: »

Accepting that this attack was homophobic in nature validates the idea that hate crimes are a real thing and that minorities do, in fact, experience challenges and setbacks that are also real and need to be addressed. This is why there is such a push to invalidate attacks like this.

Everyone knows prejudice exists. Everyone knows minorities experience challenges and setbacks. Everyone on Earth experiences challenges and setbacks. Lots of people can claim to be part of a minority group. I myself am in the minority. There is no push nor need to invalidate this attack by anyone. Some of Melania's statements automatically lack validity.

If you remove the homophobia, if you claim it's just 'scumbags being scumbags, they'd do the same to anyone', you're claiming that the playing field is already level, that there is no need to do anything to address inequalities in society because those inequalities don't actually exist.

No. There is no homophobia to remove because it hasn't been proven. There are plenty of homophobic attacks. But you cannot deny the right of the individual to judge each attack on its own, instead of jumping to the conclusion that because victim is y then the attack automatically was x. It's not objective maths.

It should be irrelevant anyway, because all victims should be treated equally. This is not the case here. I search google for couple attacked/gays attacked/lesbians attacked and all I get is pages of Melania and Chris like they're the only sufferers on the planet this month.

blinding wrote: »

If they had form for Homophobia would that not point to Homophobia .

What if they are Homosexual Men ?

What if they had a long history of Scumbagery with no Homophobia ?

We need to know more .

Perhaps they were innocents attacked by two Lesbians ?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'll leave you alone to your nonsensical ramblings.

Those aren't nonsensical ramblings. If one or all of the kids are gay then they would make very unusual homophobes indeed.

I don't agree with describing these mere kids, who have no voice in the media (unlike some), as scumbags. This isn't the Ana Kreigel case. These 15 year-olds probably have problems to which no one here is privy. They could be lower class minorities from terrible backgrounds. It could be entirely out of character. I should think they are individuals with minds and feelings too. Maybe they regret the whole episode and are entirely repentant. We simply don't know. Preconceived judgement is part of what is wrong with society.

We need a Public Court Case to see what really happened ?

Yes and I'm guessing there will be no solid information forthcoming.

Nothing surprises me with media spin and it wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing has been a hoax.* There are plenty of false flags and crisis actors out there. The way Melania Geymonat (aka dark gay month) poses in the picture as though she's already decided to post it on facebook strikes me as very odd indeed.

*Not saying that it is a hoax.

Kimsang

batgoat wrote: »

Ginger people have not had a long history of discrimination... Meanwhile the people most vocal about this attack not being homophobic seem to actively oppose hate crime legislation. Eg Kim

The problem I have is when crimes of a similar violent nature get disproportionate sentencing, because of who(i.e. sexuality/race/gender) was attacked. This flies in the face of the concept of "Justice".

I would be happy with this definition for a hate crime(traditionally accepted);

A hate crime (also known as a bias-motivated crime or bias crime) is a prejudice-motivated crime which occurs when a perpetrator targets a victim because of their membership (or perceived membership) in a certain social group or race.

This is the definition we have;

‘Any incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by hate, based on a person’s age, race, ethnicity, religious belief, gender identity, disability, or sexual orientation’ .

Perception:

• The way in which something is regarded, understood, or interpreted.

People misunderstand and misinterpret things all the time!

Also why does this law change from "certain social group/race" to listing different classes?
A ginger person can receive just as much hate for being ginger, as any of the other listed characteristics. That there is not much of a history of ginger people being discriminated against should have no effect on the merits of any individual case. Let them prove hate against them if they wish and claim it to be!

Ginger bullying should be a hate crime, dad of dead schoolgirl claims

I hate the way culture seems to be shifting this way. We used to treat people like individuals, but now more often than not we are talking about groups, everyone having 'group identities'. This seriously worries me. Or when people use 'we' instead of I. What happens next is everyone starts to identify as groups, and then you see the rise of far right groups. We were nearly done suppressing these jackass' as a society, But now in my eyes, the left have rejuvenated them.

Sheridan81

Excellent points Kimsang.

In this very case, we have Melania lumping all men into a group, telling us that men see women as sex objects. Well I'm a man and I don't.

How has she come to this conclusion when she was attacked by kids? She must have already had this prejudice (irony!). We have the same thing in Australia with all men been blamed for the murders of poor young women like Eurydice Dixon for example. Never mind that people are different individuals responsible for their own actions and situational differences in society are manifold.

The backlash to perceived misogyny for some is unapologetic misandry. Plenty of people hate men for being men. Aileen Wuornos is a famous example. Misandry is rarely judged as a hate crime. If a man is assaulted by a woman chances are you will never hear about it.

If a boy is beaten up by other teenage boys, which happens in every school up and down the country, it does not become an international story. Most male on male violence is accepted as the norm, because there is no minority involved. There is no 'group' to plead injustice based on prejudice. Never mind that it is an injustice first and foremost. The effect is the same-a bloody nose and a bloody shirt. If two straight males are assaulted hardly anyone cares.

Even recently, two gay men were injured in what was obviously a homophobic attack, but gay men beaten by other men doesn't have the same appeal as two gay women being attacked-because women are perceived as generally discriminated against too as a 'minority' so women and gay trumps just gay. They shove the story down our throats and the others are buried because they're not part of enough exclusive minority clubs.

This is the natural outcome of attaching labels to people instead of treating each case on its merits and each individual as unique. To be fair, Chris made the point in her column that all attacks should get equal attention, although I don't think she mentioned white, heterosexual males. The irony in her fury is that she was given special treatment precisely because she is in the minority.

The way this particular event was used as propaganda makes me question the validity of it all.

Another point is how on earth are these boys going to find an impartial jury? Everyone from here to Timbuktu has been fed the official line of homophobic, misogynistic thuggery. Everyone has been told that these boys are systematic symbols of an unequal society and faultless Melania and Chris have become social justice warriors and poster-children for the LGBT community at least for a short time. Chris even brought out her freshly ironed, anti-Nazi t-shirt for public appearances.

Sheridan81

I read that the person who took the picture was a fellow passenger who was 'in tears' at the sight of the two victims. I'm guessing it was a much older female.

A theory on one of the reasons this attack became a bigger story than it needed to be: Chris, who wrote a very professional column, probably works or has worked in journalism/reporting/newsrooms before. She may have friends at the BBC and Channel 4. She might have friends in high places in the news industry.

It's just a theory and may not align with the fact that there is no mention of this attack before Melania's June 5th facebook post anywhere. I checked Det. Andy Cox's twitter and it doesn't mention it until 7th June when arrests were made. I would be happy if someone could prove me wrong. It's a bit odd.

bloodless_coup

I wonder will this get a large thread:

Serious assault on Luas sees two men hospitalised
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/serious-assault-on-luas-sees-two-men-hospitalised-935208.html

Atlantic Dawn

doylefe wrote: »

I wonder will this get a large thread:

Serious assault on Luas sees two men hospitalised
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/serious-assault-on-luas-sees-two-men-hospitalised-935208.html

How is this relevant to this thread?

Timberrrrrrrr

doylefe wrote: »

I wonder will this get a large thread:

Serious assault on Luas sees two men hospitalised
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/serious-assault-on-luas-sees-two-men-hospitalised-935208.html

Thread about it here

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057994395/1/#post110623449

Annasopra

doylefe wrote: »

I wonder will this get a large thread:

Serious assault on Luas sees two men hospitalised
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/serious-assault-on-luas-sees-two-men-hospitalised-935208.html

Whatabout whataboutery

batgoat

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Whatabout whataboutery

Also much of the reason it seems to have gotten a large amount of posts because of people denying it happening or wanting to go on a rant about an entirely unrelated group.

Kimsang

batgoat wrote: »

Also much of the reason it seems to have gotten a large amount of posts because of people denying it happening or wanting to go on a rant about an entirely unrelated group.

Could you please answer two question, or anyone else that likes.

Q1) If someone was targeted, attacked and killed because they were ginger, this was later proven in court, the murderer admitted it, the murderer had diaries; Should we sentence this murderer of a ginger person(proven intent) more than we would a similar violent attack(with no intent)?

Q2) If a celebrity is attacked, should we sentence the attacker of a celebrity more than the attacker of a normal citizen?

I believe answering these questions fairly can shine some light on the discussion

Timberrrrrrrr

Kimsang wrote: »

Could you please answer two question, or anyone else that likes.

Q1) If someone was targeted, attacked and killed because they were ginger, this was later proven in court, the attacker admitted it, the attacker had diaries; Should we sentence this attacker of a ginger person(proven intent) more than we would a similar violent attack(with no intent)?

Q2) If a celebrity is attacked, should we sentence the attacker of a celebrity more than the attacker of a normal citizen?

Intent = premeditated = murder

No intent = manslaughter.

Murder will get a longer sentence than manslaughter.