Sunday, May 16, 2010
Field Notes III
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Field Notes II
As you make notes from your observations, please make sure you include the following information: 1) Date, time, and place of observation; 2) Specific facts, numbers, and details; 3) Sensory impressions: sights, sounds, textures, smells, tastes; 4) Personal response to your observations—both the act of recording and how others responded to you; 5) Specific words, phrases, summaries of conversations/interviews, and any insider language; 6) Questions that your observations generate for you as the researcher (ones that you might pursue in your subsequent observations).
As you conclude this set of notes, please write a paragraph in which you summarize your observation, paying attention to what you noticed that was either similar to your previous observation or different. What do you think accounts for this?
Finding Sources for Your Mapping Project
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Field Notes I
Ideas for Your Mapping Project
Monday, May 3, 2010
Measuring Authenticity Qualitatively
What do you think DeLyser means here? Based on her observations, what forms of authenticity do the tourists and the staff members experience in this ghost town? How does she as a researcher measure these authentic experiences? As you reflect on her conclusion, cite at least one concrete example from her observations that supports or illustrates your response.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Observing People & Places on Campus
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Writing about Your Own Personal Geography
Reflecting on Your Second Major Assignment
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Annotated Bibliographies
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Summaries of Two Scholarly Sources
Practice Works Cited Page
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Analyzing the Sand Creek Massacre Letters
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
A Choice Between Hate and Compassion: Religious Views on Homosexuality
There are numerous, clear citations in the Bible that explicitly preach against homosexuality as a sin, and against homosexuals in general; that is, those who do not repent and stop their ways. It is common for people to treat those different than themselves with a degree of fear and revulsion. This seemed to be the case with a few of the citizens of Laramie, including a Baptist pastor who was interviewed by the theatre group. This man said that, although it was a sad thing that happened to Matthew, he insinuated that the boy may have brought it upon himself. Does this mean that this righteous man truly believes that gay people ought to be put to death? Probably not, but it becomes pretty obvious that he doesn’t approve of them. He says that his hope was that as Matt lay dying there, that he had somehow heard the ‘word of God’ sometime in his life and had time to ‘reflect’ on his past choices and his lifestyle, and repent. In other words, he hoped that the hateful attack on his life had beaten a conversion into him. In a way, it was almost as if the minister believed that Matthew had been learning a lesson, or at least, had done something to deserve that sort of treatment. Historically and socially, this viewpoint seems to be a little more common among Christian and Catholic individuals, at least, stereotypically speaking. The film also portrays Fred Phelps, an independent Baptist and the pastor of his own church, who is well-known for his anti-gay protests, and claiming that most natural disasters and terrorist attacks are God's punishment for a society that tolerates homosexuality. In the film based on actual events, he stood outside the church during Matthew’s funeral and cruelly harassed the people attending, including family and friends of Matthew. He and his followers had their typical ‘God Hate Fags’ signs, among others, but they had added new slogans such as ‘Matt in Hell’, that showed a man being consumed my flames. Even more disturbing than these actions was the fact that he had small children holding these sign, teaching them from a young age to be hateful of God’s own, and of our fellow people. Is it right for us to teach these young children these things, and to raise them in such an atmosphere of prejudice and animosity that they grow up to become loathing souls like the boys who killed Matthew in the first place? It seems to these people that the whole business of ‘love thy neighbor’ can only go so far in certain cases, and it seems on the outside that religious people may seem intolerant of homosexuals, and other individuals different from themselves. These assumptions have some root; according to Andrew Whitehead of Baylor University, western religion in general promotes a negative view of homosexuality and same-sex marriages. He published his fingers and experiments, based on a series of surveys, in Social Science Quarterly; some of his findings included that religion was strongly associated with the mind frame that gay people choose their sexual orientation willingly, and also that attitudes toward same-sex unions remain negative, despite inclusion of an attribution variable. Therefore, it is concluded that even if biological factors for homosexuality are proven, unfavorable attitudes towards homosexuals and same-sex unions are expected to linger due to religion’s persistency and the faith of its followers.
Due to personal interpretation and the size of these huge communities, however, there are few sects of Christianity, Catholicism, or any kind of religion that is united enough to have a completely unified “view” on homosexuality. Like faith itself, these views vary widely depending on the individual holding these views, and their psychological, historical, and moral makeup. For example, in The Laramie Project, one of the most actively soul-searching and affirming characters is a catholic priest, who laments derogatory names and slurs towards gay people as “the seeds of hate”. He cites words and ideas as being the birthplaces of hate crimes such as the one committed against Matthew Shepard. He also mentions to his interviewers that he didn’t want anything he said to be twisted around to reflect those views of hate, since that was definitely not something that he wanted to portray in the slightest. He talked about how even something as innocent sounding as name-calling, or using slurs against gays is in actuality the ‘seeds of hate’, and are in themselves a form of violence. His compassion shone through his words, casting a more positive light on a religious community that otherwise seemed to exude fear and alienation. There are certainly religious folks who would share in these beliefs; a popular saying “love the sinner, hate the sin” embodies the ideal that all people “fall short of the glory of God”, and no matter what that sin happens to be, they are all considered brothers and sisters and human beings, even if they are homosexuals. There isn’t one particular group that identifies with this completely; again, it seems to be a matter of personal choice and value. However, there are scriptures that religious supporters, or at least tolerators, of homosexuality can point to as examples of acceptable love and companionship between two members of the same sex. For example, in some modern marriage ceremonies, the phrase: "Wherever you go, I will go, and wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people and your God my God." is used as part of the vows. Biblically, it comes from something Ruth says to Naomi. Their lives were lonely, and then they became companions to one another. The line itself is in Ruth 1:16: "And Ruth said, "Do not entreat me to leave you, to return from following you, for wherever you go, I will go, and wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people and your God my God." Whether they were actually engaged in a lesbian relationship is less the issue than the bible recognizing love between women as something acceptable, with words used between them even being applied to modern-day couples. Members of the faith do not by any means need to condone homosexuality itself; according to the scriptures it should be admonished just as much as its fellow sins pride or dishonesty should be… However, should one push away their family members because they tend to be liars, or their friends and neighbors because they boast too much? In the end, no one is completely without blame, and no one should be hated or alienated in the name of religious beliefs- a doctrine that preaches the theories of love and tolerance should be put into practice.
Summary (or Description) of Your Primary Text
The Race to end Discrimination
After our in-class viewing of "The Laramie Project," thoughtful reflection was deemed necessary. The Catholic priest’s plodding question, "Do you know how hate crimes like Matthew Shepard's start" circulated my thoughts. The priest elucidated by identifying "tiny seeds" as the roots of discrimination and as I came to grips with this statement, I noticed a growing insecurity. Am I unaware of the seeds of unfairness that have been fostered within myself? Many of us will not act out in the fashion of McKinney and Henderson , but the movie’s efforts to raise its audience’s awareness of inequity cannot be ignored. To take action toward Kaufman’s anti-discrimination message, I will move outwards from sexual orientation and examine the United States’ history of racial discrimination, unfairness in the workforce, and Colorism.
The unfortunate problem of racial discrimination has a long history in our nation. As long ago as 1863, Abraham Lincoln took his own stance on trying to improve it. His iconic Gettysburg Address states that, “Four score and seven years ago our father’s brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” Spearheading the Civil War, Lincoln’s actions went a long way to improve the United State’s unfair establishment of slavery. Years later, Civil Rights Activist, Rosa Parks, also took an action that has long since been remembered. She recalls her elementary school days, initially accepting the fact that only whites were allowed to ride the bus to school. Realizing the injustice of this racial segregation, her notion to rise up against this stuck with her. In the “Montgomery Bus Boycott”, Parks was charged with disorderly conduct for not giving her seat up to a white citizen. When asked to explain her actions on National Public Radio, Parks said that “It was just time…[this was an] opportunity for me to take a stand to express the way I felt about being treated in that manner.” Although key figures have tried to make a statement against racial discrimination, it’s presence still plagues our society.
In a case against Binghamton University, head coach Kevin Broadus filed a charge of racial discrimination; accusing the University that the color of his skin largely influenced the loss of his job. When athletic director, Jim Norris, did not let Broadus coach the team, Broadus expressed that “No one else in the department [was] treated in this manner; but the most important component is I’m the only person of color who is a head coach.” Broadus’s lawyer, Don Jackson, found that a $913, 381 audit was targeted at the basketball program targeting a group of African-American coaches and while some coaches had been arrested, none had their position of head coach suspended. Broadus’s suspicions only grew when he thought of the various arrests happening all over the country; virtually half of The University of Tennessee
basketball team was arrested for weapon and drug charges on New Year’s Eve, and of course, the head coach was not fired. Broadus feels that if he were the head coach, it may have been justification to blame the player’s actions on him, and let him go. While this may be a case where racial discrimination snuck into the workforce, America has come a long way since their initial efforts of “Jim Crow (separate but equal) Laws” where whites and blacks were still thought of as separate beings not to be intertwined in our society. More recently, Affirmative Action Policies, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and the No-FEAR Act all speak to the United State’s efforts to provide solutions to the problems which still exist within the American workplace. However, many African American’s have voiced concern not only about problems
which occur during their employment, but rather about the struggle to become employed.
The issue of having black or white skin paradoxically contains a large gray are; Colorism. Within the color black, varying shades ranging from darkest to lightest greatly impact one’s skin tone. The issue at hand is sadly that the darker the skin color, the higher the chance of discrimination. In first comparing this to people with white skin color, unnerving statistics have been found: “Blacks are twice as likely as whites to be unemployed” and “Black applicants are less likely to be given the same position even when having the same credentials as whites.” Looking closely at the above data leads to other depressing findings. African Americans that receive the benefits of Affirmative Action generally come from educated families, and most of these are of the lighter skin type; so while it appears that policies such as these are benefiting the entire African- American race, it is only benefiting a sub-type of African Americans. These statistics point to the fact that while a lot of work as been done to better the state of racial discrimination, The United States has a long way to go in truly stopping all racial inequity.
As I opened by questioning my awareness of the unfair seeds nestling inside myself, I will close with a thought on how various kinds of discrimination are planted. A young child may innocently ask you, “Why don’t people like those people?” or “Why can’t he walk like I can?” It’s important to teach our children that when others are different from us, a significant amount of fear instills itself which is often later realized as petty name-calling and other forms of negative treatment. As children grow up, it would be nice to think that perceived differences become less and less important and the ability to respect others for their differences would be instilled; remembering incidents such as Matthew Shepard’s reminds us that this is not the case. My hypothesis is that some children never forego this paradigm shift because they too, having felt the pain caused from their own differences, learned that their inherent individuality was a source of self-loathing and certainly nothing to be prideful of. As far fetched as it may seem, the reason it is so impossible for the most discriminative people to view others' differences as a uniquely positive characteristic is because they don’t also view their own differences as a
positive thing. Discrimination continues to be an outstanding issue within our society, but by promoting sensitivity toward others, equality on all fronts could make great strides.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Alex Befus
Laramie, Wyoming is described as a small jewel of the west and a quiet Midwestern city. Matthew Shepard was described as a happy man who smiled at everyone and cared more about his shoes than the football games on television and for the sole reason of difference faced death in the town of Laramie. Throughout the 1990’s Laramie was targeted as a city promoting hate crimes when a young college student named Matthew Shepard was brutally beaten and tied to a fence left to die. This occurrence was significant in the Midwest and eventually around the world. The beating took place because Matthew Shepard was a gay man. Hate crimes are defined as criminal offenses motivated either entirely or in part by the fact or perception that a victim is different from the perpetrator (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/hate_crime/index.html). Though some believe there is more to a hate crime than hate. It can easily be considered that ignorance/intolerance, fear and personal backgrounds psychologically affect people’s actions and reactions to difference.
One of the key elements to hate crimes is that there is some difference, whether it is ethnicity, religion, race, looks, and in Matthew Sheppard’s case it was sexual orientation. To a small town like Laramie, Wyoming a gay man was an outsider. The town flourished as a farming city where good hard work was valued and masculinity was a common theme throughout the townspeople. It’s not as if they didn’t know what a homosexual was, though they never personally had the experience with one and with such a masculine background the thought of it disgusted them. According to psychologist George Weinberg, who conducted a research of the degree of sexual prejudice, people who are older, less educated, living in the Midwest or south and living in rural areas have less of a tolerance for homosexuals (http://0-cdp.sagepub.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/content/9/1/19.abstract). Laramie fits into at least two of these categories, a rural area and Midwest, and with further research into the population quite possibly more. So their mentality of live and let live is already untrue according to scientific research. Even further most of the towns’ strict religious background plays into their intolerance. Laramie is mostly a Baptist town and almost everyone in the town went to church and studied the bible, which does condemn homosexuality. In the movie Amanda confronted the Baptist minister trying to understand his feelings and thoughts about the attention and murder of Matt and basically was told by the minister that he hoped Matt had time to consider what kind of lifestyle he had. This is significant and proves the idea that intolerance can lead to violent actions because before he stated this he was discussing that he and the town included were very tolerable people, back to the “live and let live” mentality.
Another idea that psychologists mention that control how people get to boiling point of committing a hate crime is personal background. People who are born into a certain kind of stereotype and prejudice don’t know anything different. In their eyes they don’t understand that what they are saying, and in this case doing, towards someone that is different from them is wrong. They are taught growing up that hating and being offended by homosexuality is nowhere near wrong. For example, a young man part of the skinhead “gang” in the United States came and talked to our schools’ athletes about why he committed so many hate crimes. He described the feeling of acceptance within his own gang, and was taught different morals and ideals according to the people surrounding him. To him it was perfectly fine to bash in someone’s head and to yell profane things. He said he didn’t know anything different and never even considered not doing it because of who he was surrounded by and what he grew up hearing. Likewise in Laramie, a town pretty much in the outer corner of Wyoming pretty isolated to itself, the citizens are not surrounded by a wide variety of people and ideals. The psychology department at the University Of Illinois conducted a research figuring out the main reasons hate crimes are committed (http://0-www.springerlink.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/content/mnvk5416480p2678/fulltext.pdf). They found out 39% of crimes committed are not necessarily hate or anger but ignorance. So although we tend to think hate crimes are solely committed based on hate of a certain group or individual, it is apparent other factors are largely playing roles under the covers. In Laramie, ignorance was a key issue for the two local boys who murdered Matthew Shepard.
One of the last main ideals surrounding the study of hate crimes and why they exist is fear; fear of the unknown, fear of change, fear of difference. The study done at the University of Illinois suggested that 19% of hate crimes occur out of fear(http://0-www.springerlink.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/content/mnvk5416480p2678/fulltext.pdf). Many things cause people to be fearful and when they are afraid they are at their weakest mentally. Psychologist Donald Green at Yale University mentions that people who are fearful turn to defense mechanisms such as hate crimes to keep themselves superior and confident in themselves. This justifies the reasoning for the hate crimes occurring in a place like Laramie, Wyoming. Along with the other characteristics pertaining to Laramie and the crime committed there this might be the most important one. Considering the perpetrators were men and highly conscious of their masculinity, they were truly afraid of Matthew Shepard.
During the interview of the perpetrator he was asked what Matthew was doing that made them want to rob and hurt him. He answered that he didn’t know what he was going to do, being a queer and all. Right there is the fear of the unknown, and in a distressful situation the only thing he could think of doing was to commit an act of violence towards Matt. He clearly didn’t think it was wrong. He wasn’t taught to stop and consider his words or actions towards a gay man, if he even thought he was a man. Many times throughout the film, The Laramie Project, Matt was referred to as the queer, fag, homosexual, etc.
So when citizens of the town ask “What the hell were they thinking”, it could be said that simply they were not and now it’s understandable that Laramie, Wyoming isn’t such an odd place for a hate crime to occur. The studies shown and information I’ve collected regarding hate crimes and their relationship to a place like Laramie really solidify that hate crimes are not just all about hate. Ignorance, fear, intolerance, and background do shape someone’s mentality about a certain subject; in this case the perpetrators reaction to Matthew Shepard being gay. Also, these characteristics of a hate crime can be easily molded specifically to Laramie, even more so then other places. They have strong masculine and religious backgrounds, the city was not raised liberal with the idea of flaunting your sexuality, and many people were afraid of the change and difference. So maybe the people of Laramie are right when they say “Hate is not a Laramie Value”, and in the end it’s as much their fault as it is Aaron Mckinneys’ and Russell Hendersons’.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Reflecting on Our First Assignment
A Parent's Nightmare
Hayley Hoffman
Writing 1133
A Parent’s Nightmare
How would you react if your child was brutally beat to death because of who they are? Matthew Shepard was born in Wyoming on December 1, 1976. Although shy at first, he was actually quite the people person. The Matthew Shepard Foundation bio explains that Matthew “made friends easily and actively fought for the acceptance of all people.” Matt’s passion for equality led him to be elected as a peer counselor and later to join the gay and lesbian group on his college campus, the University of Wyoming in Laramie. Matthew Shepard was the victim of a hate crime because of his sexual orientation. His parents’, Dennis and Judy Shepard, reaction, however, truly represents the belief that even light can be found in something miserably dark.
Although some claim that gay people choose their sexual orientation, research supports the idea that one’s biology can strongly effect their orientation. According to the popular website, Evidence for God, “it has been hypothesized that homosexuality may result from a differential hormone balance in the wombs of those who eventually exhibit a homosexual orientation.” These findings explain that essentially, Matthew’s identity was determined in the womb. It was by chance that Matthew and thousands of others were born gay. Therefore, Dennis and Judy Shepard’s son was killed for something out of his own control.
According to the bartender, Matt was minding his own business at the bar on October 7th when suddenly he noticed two men talking to him. Little did the bartender know that when the three left, as told through The Matthew Shepard Foundation, “Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson lead him to a remote area east of Laramie, Wyoming.” Matthew was then tied to a fence and severely beaten. He was left unconscious for over 18 hours when a bicyclist stumbled upon his body. Matthew Shepard died at the Poudre Valley Hospital on October 12 at 12:53 a.m. (source 1)
When Matt remained in the hospital for those days before his death, people across the nation and the world, parents just like you, sent their condolences to Dennis and Judy. The horrific incident controlled the media for multiple days and families followed the story with great sorrow for the Shepards. As the doctors updated the media with Matthew’s health, they also conveyed his parents’ gratitude to those supporting them during the unjust time.
One doctor confessed what he was feeling when he broke down crying during a press conference. He stood before numerous cameras updating the world on Matthew’s health, when he paused and began to sob. The doctor told the interviewers of The Laramie Project, that he thought of his own daughters and his own family and how precious they are to him, having seen the Shepard family shatter in front of his eyes. He, along with the thousands of parents following the story, felt an immense amount of sorrow for Dennis and Judy. These parents were forced to step away from their opinions of homosexuality and become deeply grateful for their families, for their children.
After the court found the two men guilty, Dennis Shepard presented a powerful speech in response to the debate of Aaron McKinney’s punishment. Thirteen months after the death of his son, he conveyed how extremely upset and emotional he still was about the incident. He explained to the courthouse how Matthew had to pay the price of opening their eyes to hate occurring in Laramie, America and the world. He expressed frustration because his son wanted to make a difference. Matthew overcame obstacles that many could not in his short lifetime. He was strong and even if he cried on the inside, he put on a smile. Dennis described that although his son did not look like a winner, he acted like one. And he confessed the guilt he felt now that his son would not be back, wondering how he could have been a better father. Yet, he also expressed how proud he was to be to be Matt’s dad, and how grateful he was to have such an amazing son. Although he stated that he would love to see nothing more than those who killed his son to die, too, he declared he would grant them life. Dennis’ reasoning was for Matthew. He looked the men in the eyes and said that every time they woke up in the morning they would think about Matt and feel grateful to be alive. What would you have to say to those responsible for your child’s death? Would you get some sort of compensation by putting them to death? Or would you have thhe strength to let them live, just as Matt’s dad granted? Dennis’s speech to the courthouse thirteen years later truly represented how most parents would feel losing a child to a hate crime. However, some parents might not have been able to express their feelings the way he did that day.
Although Judy Shepard did not present a speech to the courthouse, she used her son’s awful death to inspire her. Judy and her husband founded The Matthew Shepard Foundation. She constantly travels around the world to encourage people to “embrace diversity and erase hate.” The foundation acts as a (place) to share stories that will make a difference. It coordinates “fundraising and educational events across the nation,” while also sponsoring other similar events. The foundation has grown tremendously and therefore been able to produce its own public service announcements. These announcements serve to educate families, communities and America about the need to replace existing hate with “understanding, compassion and acceptance.” Often when one loses their child, whether to a car accident, gang violence or a crime like this, they tend to shy away from the world and hold their frustrations and sorrow inside. Judy Shepard changed her lifestyle when she lost her son. She used inspiration from Matthew’s short life and his story to teach thousands the importance of acceptance.
It’s because of parents like Dennis and Judy that we have the government getting involved to support ideas for a better America. Just recently, President Obama signed a bill that would make it a “federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.” The bill was named for James Byrd Jr. and Matthew Shepard. Foundations like the one Judy Shepard created, are not only supporting citizens with similar stories, but they are actually making a difference in the laws that all Americans must abide by.
Dennis and Judy had a beautiful son who, by biological chance, happened to be gay. When Matthew Shepard was killed because of his sexuality, his parents took charge of their lives in honor of their boy. Dennis expressed what a wonderful child Matthew was and how he was proud of his accomplishments in such a short life. He granted life to those guilty of taking Matt although he could have, and even wanted to, out them to death. Later, Judy founded an organization dedicated to “embracing diversity.” She traveled the world to share her story, Matthew’s story. Because of parents like Dennis and Judy Shepard, America has been taking steps towards acceptance by passing hate crime laws. These individuals dedicated themselves in hopes for a brighter tomorrow, where hate crimes like the terrible one that took Matthew’s life, will no longer exist and people will love one another despite race, gender and sexuality.
The Power of film: Milk and The Laramie Project
Two films, two different people, a politician and a student, twenty years apart, showing the world that something needs to change. Prejudices need to be broken and equality needs to prevail. The film Milk was released in 2008 and is based off of the life of Harvey Milk. He was the first openly gay man to be elected into political office in California. He fought for gay rights throughout his life before and during his political career. He is best known for winning his No Campaign against proposition 6, which stated that homosexuals and anyone who associated themselves with a homosexual were banned from teaching. Three weeks after his victory Harvey Milk was assassinated November 27, 1978 by a resigned supervisor named Daniel White. In 2002, six years before Milk was released, The Laramie Project was released based on the play with the same name about the murder of Matthew Shepard and how it affected the town of Laramie, Wyoming. Matthew Shepard was a twenty-one year old student at the University of Wyoming who was severely beaten on October 6, 1998 leading to his death in a hospital in Fort Collins, Colorado, October 12, 1998. These two men represent more than twenty years of prejudice and discrimination with little change. Through the power of film, these two stories advocate change and promote people to take a stand. The films show that even though these events are in our countries past they still can teach us today.
The two films represent the gay right movement by advocating that change needs to happen and exemplifying that the fight for gay rights is just beginning. Milk was directed by Gus Van Sant . Sant exemplifies his vision by centering the film around the figure of Harvey Milk and the important events and relationships in his life. In order to make the film more realistic he incorporates actual video footage from Harvey Milk’s life with the video that he captures himself for the film. By incorporating this footage the ethos of the film is strengthened and the accuracy of the film increases. The film shows how Harvey Milk started off as just another simple human being, but had a fire lit inside of him to advocate change in society and the views that society held against homosexuals.
Moises Kaufman of the Tectonic Theatre Project directed The Laramie Project and released it four years after the murder of Matthew Shepard and six years before Milk was released. Kaufman’s film reached out to people across the country about the story of Matthew Shepard and his murder. In Kaufman’s vision he decided that a physical representative of Matthew Shepard would not be present in the film. Instead the character of Matthew Shepard is created through the dialogue of numerous characters in the film. The ethos and authenticity of the film are the result of basing the script and the overall film on more than two hundred interviews that Kaufman and his crew collected from the residents of Laramie, Wyoming.
Comparing these two films brings up many questions. One such question is; why was the film Milk released thirty years after the death of Harvey Milk, while The Laramie Project was released four years after the death of Matthew Shepard? The answer to this question is up for interpretation, however I believe that Harvey Milk himself created his own legacy throughout his life while Matthew Shepard’s legacy was created when he was actually murdered. James Brooks of The New York Times stated Matthew Shepard “became an overnight symbol of deadly violence against gay people.” I believe that The Laramie Project was made in direct response to the murder of Matthew Shepard and was released with haste in order to show the world the harsh realities about hate crimes. Milk on the other hand was limited released November 26 and 27, 2008, exactly thirty years after the assassination of Harvey Milk.. I believe that the motion picture Milk was made as a rebirth and a reminder to society of who Harvey Milk was instead of a direct response to his assassination. When the film Milk was released in 2008 Proposition 8 was a very big issue in California and made it so only a man and a woman could get married in the state of California. This changed the entire purpose and impact that the film Milk had on society. As stated in an article written by Dennis Lim on Harvey Milk, “…not many films occasion three New York Times articles and a Maureen Dowd column before they open.” He continues saying, “The passage of Prop 8 transformed Van Sant’s film…There are moments in the film that now seem to traverse time and space, as if telepathically addressing the struggles of the present day. As the Prop 6 results start to roll in Harvey tells his followers: ‘If this thing passes, fight the hell back.’”
Gus Van Sant and Moises Kaufman interpreted how they wanted to portray their main character in their films differently bringing up another question. Why wasn’t Matthew Shepard an actual character in The Laramie Project, while Harvey Milk was the main character in Milk? This question is also up for interpretation, however I believe by making Matthew Shepard a faceless character in The Laramie Project, Kaufman is able to transform Matthew Shepard into a broad symbol of the gay rights movement that everyone can put a face to. Harvey Milk on the other hand, created his own special persona throughout his life and is known by the impact he made throughout his life. Therefore, it was important for Sant to choose an actor who could give the role justice and show the world again who Harvey Milk was. He found this in the very talented Sean Penn.
The power of film is exemplified by both of these films and the legacies that their characters have created. Harvey Milk and Matthew Shepard are both looked at as national icons in the gay rights movement. Harvey Milk created his own legacy by never giving up after running for city supervisor in San Francisco over and over again until he was able to actually win it. He influenced homosexuals throughout the country by telling them that they could be who they were and let the world know that homosexuality wasn’t a mental illness. Matthew Shepard was looked at as somewhat of Jesus figure. It was stated in a New York Times article that, “'There is incredible symbolism about being tied to a fence,'' said Rebecca Isaacs, political director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington. ''People have likened it to a scarecrow. But it sounded more like a crucifixion.'' The Laramie Project has brought out the significance of the murder of Matthew Shepard and has shown the world how wrong it was. Both of these films show the world that prejudices are wrong and that homosexuality is NOT wrong. In the words of Harvey Milk, “If a bullet should go through my head let that bullet go through every closet door.”
Saturday, April 10, 2010
To Each His Own
To Each His Own
“If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death” (Lev 18:22-23). Perhaps, Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney took this message from the bible literally, and executed Matthew Shepard for his “sinful” actions. The way in which Matthew Shepard was harassed, brutally murdered, and left to die, tied to a fence in the wide, open plains of Laramie, Wyoming truly reflects the theme of the “wild west.” However, Matthew Shepard was murdered just before the new millennium. Matthew was crucified, ironically tortured in a similar way as Jesus Christ. In a modern society where many citizens have altered or drastically changed their beliefs regarding homosexuality, a large percentage of Americans still standby their traditional ideals. How come these people strictly hold on to their original, conventional ideals?
The people of Laramie, Wyoming, the hostility of the town in general, as well as its overall atmosphere reveals isolation from the rest of the modernized world. The hate Aaron McKinney, Russell Henderson, Fred Phelps, and other homophobic antigay followers have for gays and lesbians is something that needs reason or explanation. The hate Russell and Henderson obtained towards Matthew in order to brutally injure and abandon him to die is surreal. It is something one would see happen in a movie. What caused these people to truly believe that “God Hates Fags” and that being gay is unacceptable and “wrong.” How do these people become so hateful? Who promotes these assertive beliefs? Fred Phelps. The 81 year old homophobic founder of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas is notoriously known for his anti-gay protests, hateful sermons, and steadfast beliefs towards homosexual citizens; this essay will reveal Phelps Christian motives and influences from the bible that have led him to religiously follow his dogmatic beliefs as well as explore the intentions of Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney in committing the homicide of Matthew Shepard.
Fred Phelps is a Christian who follows fundamental Baptist beliefs using what the bible says as God’s literal word. A different branch of Christianity, Phelps fundamental Baptist beliefs teach, “God does not love everyone” and that we must “fear God and keep his commandments.” His Baptist church participates in cult-like tendencies, such as, picket rallies, and group gatherings. The way that Phelps and his followers picket is extremely hateful and disrespectful to the beliefs of others. At Matthew Shepard’s funeral in 1998 Phelps and a group of believers held cruel signs displaying quotes such as, “God Hates Fags” as well as hateful comments regarding AIDS and HIV and their relation to homosexuals. Although Phelps and his fellow believers have the right by the second amendment to express their thoughts and ideas, the way in which they picket so hatefully feels as an embarrassment to more modern based Christians. Many view these acts of rebellion by Phelps and his followers as “unchristian.” What does the bible actually say about homosexuality? “Lev 18:22-23 proclaims, “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Lev 18:22-23). These words, thoughts, and opinions were written in the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament before Christ was born. These are “traditional” beliefs that many Christians have chosen to live their lives by. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs, and this is a value most Americans claim to respect, but when someone is murdered for being gay in the 21st century it becomes something far from respect, it is arrogance and complete savagery.
Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson claim that the killing of Matthew Shepard was “a robbery gone bad, not a hate crime.” What caused Russell and Henderson to commit such a gruesome, violent, and surreal act? There really is no clear answer. Russell and Henderson purely and simply do not like gay people. Not everyone likes each other, it is understandable, but nobody deserves to be treated the way Shepard was on October 12th, 1998. Gregory Koukl, author of “Equal Rights for Homosexuals” respectfully reveals the reasons why he and many Christians alike follow the right-handed views regarding the subject of homosexuality. Koukl expresses, “Most people who consider homosexuality deeply immoral don't do so because they hate homosexuals. They have principled moral objections…you see, this isn’t about us forcing our views on them. This is about conservatives and morally-minded people being allowed to express their moral point of view and act on it. This isn’t about homosexual liberties; it’s about our liberties” (Koukl, Equal Rights for Homosexuals). Koukl feels threatened by modern views, and truly wants to preserve his beliefs, his personal liberties. Although, intolerance of different cultures, genders, religions, sexual orientation, and ethnicities disregard our “American values,” all of humanity is entailed to their own beliefs; both sides should present respect.
After viewing The Laramie Project, and hearing Henderson and McKinney pronounce their testimonies and alibis, I was shocked to see the lack of remorse they had for their actions. District court judge Jeffrey A. Donnell told Henderson, "You drove the vehicle, you bound him to that fence in order that he might be more savagely beaten. At the very least you stood by as he was struck again and again and again. You did nothing [in court] but concede your involvement." The murder of Matthew Shepard was "savage, brutal," Donnell told Henderson, "and lacking in respect for human life, regardless if [Matthew's life] was different from your own or not" (Donnell). Donnell emphasizes the fact that even if Russell and Henderson disagreed with Matthew’s way of life, they had no right to inflict the harmful actions they did on him that night. Donnell continues, “The court does not believe you feel real remorse…this vile, senseless crime victimized Matthew, his family, your family, your community. You are not a victim, you are a perpetrator” (Donnell). There is no excuse, no type of explanation, for the killing of Matthew Shepard. There is reason, very difficult and illegitimate in my opinion, but there is reason for why he was disliked. At Matthew’s court hearings, Dennis Shepard, expressed, “My son was born blind,” he said. “Not physically blind, but blind to people’s differences-short or tall, black, brown or white, religion or ethnic backgrounds. His friends included gays and so-called straights” (Shepard). We do live in a world where homosexuals and heterosexuals are friends, blacks and whites are friends, Jews and Christians are friends. Why is it such a problem to accept difference?
Fred Phelps, Aaron McKinney, and Russell Henderson have a right to their beliefs, and this is respected, however, their hateful actions cannot be justified. After the murder of Matthew Shepard occurred in Laramie, Wyoming the small western town was forever changed. Some local citizens feeling appalled after this incident expressed their emotions, stating bold phrases, such as, “it offends us” and that Laramie is “this kind of town.” Emotionally, mentally, and physically hurt by the situation, a huge portion of the community felt motivated to participate in the making of Moisés Kaufman’s The Laramie Project. Although Laramie is still populated with many conservative citizens against homosexuality, the murder of Matthew and the response from the world impacted Laramie forever. The murder has opened a majority of citizens’ eyes to new ideas, thoughts, and beliefs of acceptance. Matthew acts as a figure of Jesus. He was tragically crucified, but left this earth with all that he believed in. Matthew, as he uncomfortably suffered through his last moments of life hopefully felt some peace with the earth, for “the last thing he saw on this earth was the sparkling lights of Laramie, Wyoming” (The Laramie Project).
Sources
http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5226
http://webspace.webring.com/people/xp/pebx/henderson.html
Friday, April 9, 2010
Live and Let Die
One of the first reasons often cited is that alcohol or drug use renders a person unable to control his or her actions and thus he should not be held accountable. Because a person is inebriated or “high,” society is supposed to accept that whatever the act it isn’t that person’s fault. When Aaron McKinney was interviewed by the police, he stated: “I don’t know what happened. I blacked out. I felt possessed. It was like I left my body. It’s like I could see what was going on, but someone else was doing it.” However, the bartender reported that neither one of them were intoxicated. He also stated that Matthew did not approach them. The testimony of McKinney’s girlfriend contradicted the claim as well when she reported that “she did not see any signs that McKinney had been using drugs that night.”
But drug and alcohol intoxication is not itself a defense for committing a crime. While either “can be used to raise reasonable doubt about a specific intent that is an integral element of some crimes…intoxication is no excuse for committing a crime.” This debate actually has gone on for centuries as to whether intoxication should partially excuse or increase the gravity of the crime. For example, Aristotle thought the penalty for a crime committed while intoxicated should be doubled “since in addition to the crime, the intoxicated individual was setting a bad example for others.” If someone has a problem of abusing drugs or alcohol, society must provide the means to help that individual long before someone else pays the price.
A second attempted excuse if that somehow it was the victim’s fault because of something they did or who they are caused the perpetrator to act. Dion Custis, defense attorney for McKinney, stated: “The fact is Matthew Shepard made an advance. It’s something Aaron McKinney responded to. The emotional aspect and state of mind is the defense, as it pertains to premeditated murder.” In fact, McKinney claimed that they “wanted to teach him a lesson” and that was good enough as a basis for carrying out this hate crime. The town’s mentality supposedly was “live and let live” but in reality it was “live as I live or I have a problem with you.” Astonishingly McKinney in a call to a local radio station while in jail made the argument that his “disgust for homosexuals was exactly the motive for the brutal attack.”
Closely related to “the victim deserved it” is the “Gay Panic” defense. The defense
attorneys argued “his (McKinney’s) sexually confusing history forged the primary catalyst” for the attack. Tangeman argued that Shepard had provoked the attack “with a humiliating sexual advance that sent McKinney into five minutes of emotional rage and chaos.” He revelaed McKinney’s history of homosexual experiences, including forced oral sex at age 7 and consensual gay sex at 15.” The defense actually claimed that Shepard, who was savagely beaten, tied to a fence and left to die, was the aggressor and that his actions caused McKinney to go into a rage. The reality was far different as testified to by the employees of the bar who said Henderson and McKinney approached Shepard and that they had previously agreed to rob Shepard. Also, the “gay panic defense” is a concept that does not exist in statute law. It is simply an attempt by a defendant to “win sympathy from the jury by characterizing the victim as a homosexual predator and by demonstrating that the defendant found the advances so repugnant that he resorted to violence.” Fortunately, this defense strategy while effective in the past is less so today. As Beatrice Dohrn, the legal director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, noted: “lawyers historically could win lighter sentences, even acquittals, for people accused of violent crimes against gays simply by playing to a jury’s homophobic bias. But as Americans have grown more accepting of gay men…defense lawyers are finding that they can no longer expect the response of juries to be based purely on prejudice.”
So what is to be done? What role can colleges and universities play to better equip their graduates to put an end to the “live and let die” mentality built on hatred and prejudice. Several key responses are indicated. First, and perhaps most obvious, there is a need for tolerance, not only in words but in actions. There is little doubt that McKinney’s intolerance and hatred of gays played a major role in the savage death of Matthew Shepard. There was no real remorse. McKinney stated in court: “I really don’t know what to say other than that I’m truly sorry to the entire Shepard family. Never will a day go by I won’t be ashamed for what I have done.” However, in the film, The Laramie Project, the judge stated that he did not believe that McKinney was truly sorry and did not believe the statement McKinney had made was deeply felt or that he actually believed what he said.
Society needs to take a stand against such hatred and prejudice. Part of a solution certainly is better education early on concerning differences and acceptance. We all need to be more vocal in support of those who are victims of prejudice and hate. As mentioned before, we need to help people who have abuse issues whether that be drug or alcohol since that can provide the “fuel” for intolerable acts.
Secondly, personal responsibility must be taught. Such seems to go against our innate human nature. The tendency is to blame others and to not accept personal responsibility. The defense in this case was built on “factors” – alcohol, drugs, past abuse, victim as “real aggressor” and the like – all of which were supposed to somehow lessen the viciousness and stark reality of what McKinney had done. But the time to blame others must be over! Each of us must take our stand for others!
A Letter of Hope By: Michelle Nguyen
I am writing to you in regards to Matthew Shepard. I know your town has been continuing to recover from the horrific hate crime inflicted on this young adult and I want to express my sincere sympathy for what your town has had to deal with. I am writing to you because I feel that there is an extreme problem with hate crimes that seems to be increasing across our country and something needs to be done. An idea I had is that the town of Laramie can use the Matthew Shepard story and serve as an advocate for hate crimes which will educate Americans on how to create a better environment for all people. I hope this letter will encourage you to join this cause allow others to have a better understanding of the views of others not based upon what they have known for their whole lives. I truly believe using the Matthew Shepard case to educate people about the severity of hate crimes and the effects it can have will give people a better perspective as well as begin to lower the amont of hate crimes occurring today.
In the dictionary, hate crime is defined as a crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward a member of a gender, racial, religious, or social group. I know that the people of Laramie were not expecting to be known as a town that classified hate, until Matthew was brutally beaten because of his unique sexual orientation. Matthew Shepard was a victim of hate for being a homosexual and was not able to express his sexual orientation or defend himself from those who didn’t quite understand his views. Surprisingly, the ones who murdered Matthew Shepard were locals from your town which is known to be a safe place. From Matt’s death, I am sure it has left a huge impact on Laramie but not only that but worldwide.
The impact of this horrific act quickly spread across the United States, homosexuals were reminded that their beliefs were misjudged to the rest of society. This created more insecurities and acts to fight against the hate crimes that were directed towards their life style or community. In respond to the case of Matthew Shepard, The Laramie Project was created which depicts the tragic events that occurred that day and allows viewers to see the story of Matthew Shepard and others involved. The Laramie Project also allowed people not familiar with the case of Matthew Shepard to show his story but to show the world that no one should discriminate based on how a person should live their lives.
The Laramie project illustrated that you are a state that stands up against hate crimes, but there is still some that feel Matthew does not deserve justice. According to your town’s website, it described Laramie as “a place filled with hospitality, entertainment and excitement, where we welcome visitors from all corners of the globe.” As I look at your town and its descriptions, it doesn’t give me the sense that your town is one full of hate. The movie did show that some of the younger generation did support Matthew, but it also showed that your town has people who do not understand Matt’s life style and were ready to judge. An example where I notice that your town did not show that they were willing to understand Matt’s views was when Sherry Johnson one of the people interview for the Laramie Project announced that Matthew should not have received all the publicity that he did because everyone dies and those who served for our state are not recognized. I do realize that these people do have a point that we should care for those who die in the force, but Sherry would like the town to see that her view should show respect for those who care most about the equality of people. I know that not everyone thinks of hate as a serious issue but hate is shown everywhere.
An example of this occurred in recent events in 2008 in Oxnard, California, a 15 year old boy was shot in the head at his middle school by a 14 year old boy who was classified as a homophobe. Lawrence King died because he expressed his unique sexual orientation which later progressed into young teens harassing Lawrence for being gay. The New York Times states, “The gunman, identified by the police as Brandon McInerney, “is just as much a victim as Lawrence,” said Masen Davis, executive director of the Transgender Law Center. “He’s a victim of homophobia and hate.” This was shocking to read because a kid that was so young was killed for wanting to be something he felt he should be and by someone that was about his own age. It is surprising to me that kids that young experience hate and learn to hate before they even begin to learn that some people are different in beliefs. I believe that Brandon was not given the chance to understand the views of Lawrence and now a 14 year old kid is serving 52 years to life in prison for this wrongful act. The New York Times also states, “The shooting stunned residents of Oxnard, a laid-back middle-class beach community just north of Malibu. It also drew a strong reaction from gay and civil rights groups.” This shows that hate crimes are still going on and can happen anywhere. This is similar to Matt’s case because they died because of their sexual orientation as result to hate.
Although most people in your town do not discriminate those who choose to be homosexuals there are many places that do. These people who watched the discrimination happen did not have the courage to stand up for those of a different sexual orientation and stand up and fight the sexual inequality which led to serious hate crimes.
A person that has tried to educate the seriousness of hate crimes is Judy Shepard. She wanted to make a difference in the world because she wanted to show people that Matthew wanted to be who he wanted to be. As a result she started The Matthew Shepard Foundation, where their mission is to create diversity to help youth establish a safe place for people to be themselves. Judy Shepard is able to tell her story of Matt and how she feels that he has impacted the world. She states, “The life and death of Matthew Shepard changed the way we talk about, and deal with, hate in America. Since his death, Matt’s legacy has challenged and inspired millions of individuals to erase hate in all its forms. Although Matt’s life was short, his story continues to have a great impact on young and old alike. His legacy lives on in thousands of people like you who actively fight to replace hate with understanding, compassion and acceptance.”
I hope this letter will motivate you to take a step to fight against hate crimes nationwide because it happened in your own backyard. Your town has experienced it firsthand which means you know the seriousness to this issue. With that said I feel it is important for the country to be educated in this hateful act, so we as the people can prevent cases like Matt’s from ever occurring again.
Sincerely,
Michelle Nguyen
Euality for All - We Are Not There Yet
The case of Matthew Shepard is one of the more popular of gay hate crimes that have occurred in the United States. Media from around the country came to the small town of Laramie to report on this tragedy. The publicity as well as the play written about the death, The Laramie Project showed one of the intense examples of violence toward homosexuals. The injustices presented in this instance are some of the most graphic and unfair examples of hate. Two young men in Laramie beat Matthew and left him to die. The Laramie Project gave the country a look into this small town, and how some of the citizens decided to act in the face of the unfamiliar, as well as the town’s reactions. Some of the most stirring lines of the film are when one of the women that were interviewed refutes all of the townspeople’s shock and denial that something that horrible could happen in their town, with their people, by stating “we live in a town, a state, a country where shit like this happens...we are like this.” Laramie Project script This is the reality. Hate crimes toward homosexuals and other groups occur all over the country, all the time. This is unacceptable.
Another hate crime dealing with homosexuality that received less media coverage than the case of Matthew Shepard was the death of 23 year-old Charles Howard in 1984. On July 7th, he was attacked as he was walking, minding his own business, by three young men in Bangor, Maine. They harassed him, yelled insults degrading his sexuality, and finally threw him over the State Street Bridge into the Kenduskeag Stream, were he had an asthma attack and drowned. Hate Crimes Against Homosexuality. Horrific examples such as these show that our country is not as peaceful, respectful, or as tolerant as we would like.
Another instance of hate based violence toward homosexuals was the assassination of Harvey Milk in 1978 in San Francisco. Milk was the first openly gay man to be admitted to a legitimate political office. He fought strongly for gay rights and it took three attempts at running for office to finally make it. He was chosen as one of the 20 most influential politicians of the 20th Century by TIME Magazine. On November 27th, he was shot and killed by former city-supervisor Dan White, who had recently quit his position in protest to the city’s gay rights laws. His death was very hard on the people of San Francisco, who had fought so hard and for so long to get Harvey into office, yet the man responsible for his death, White, was only convicted of manslaughter and served five years in prison. Milk. This was such a small sentence for someone who admitted to intentionally trying to kill someone. The tragic deaths of both Matthew Shepard and Charles Howard are just two of the numerous cases of violence based on hate. These crimes should be unacceptable in our country.
There have been glimpses of hope for anti-hate legislation in the United States. The first national hate crime laws were passed in 1968, protecting people against hate crimes as a result of race, religion, or national origin. Additionally, in 2005, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed. This act added sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, and disability to the previous list of the traits passed in 1968, yet only on a local stage. This helped the problem on a local level, yet there was no national legislation until very recently. It was not until November of 2009 that President Obama passed the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. The act advanced the previous legislation of 1968, expanding it to include violence based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. It is admirable of the federal government to finally add these to the law, yet it is ridiculous that it took eleven years following the tragedy of Matthew Shepard’s death to put it into effect. Government action should have been immediate. Undoubtably, it is wrong for people to act with violence toward homosexuals as well as any person, and although the government recognized this, there is still more that they can do. The punishment could definitely be harsher.
Although it is definitely the responsibility of the government to come up with proper punishments, it is up to regular people in society to spread the idea of equality and acceptance. “Homophobia” is an unfortunate term that describes the fear or unfamiliarity with two members of the same sex involved in a romantic relationship. Parents should teach their children to be respectful and tolerant of other’s lives, even if homosexuality is not a path they chose to follow or support. Additionally, this idea can be spread in places of education. The more institutions that support the education of children and adults for anti-violent action in the face of inequality will have an undoubtedly positive effect on the world we live in.
Overall, hate crimes in general are horrible ways that people in our society express hatred toward others simply because they are different. It is unfortunate that such crimes are a problem in a country that was founded with the idea of freedom and for all. People should have the freedom to behave how they wish, to act in whatever way they see fit, and we all have the right to be respected and treated with kindness, regardless of sexual orientation. We all have the opportunity and the responsibility to fight for peace and harmony in our country, and we should seize it. Gay hate crimes and violence should not be tolerated. The government needs to create harsher laws to help the problem, yet we as individuals need to take steps in our own lives to ensure that we all get along and make it through alive and happy.
How does planting hate into the minds of children contribute to violence?
It was October 17th, 1998; it was a day full of mourning in Laramie. It was the day of Matthew Shepard’s funeral. “On the day of the funeral was it snowing and raining so bad by the time I got there, there were already thousands of people there dressed in black, umbrellas everywhere and they had two churches set up and still there were hundreds of people outside that couldn’t fit into either one of the churches and they had this park set up and the park was full” (Laramie Project). People filled the streets in support of the lost life in their town. Across from the church there was a park and in that park stood Fred Phelps and some of his followers. Fred Phelps and his followers were having a protest. Phelps was preaching about hatred and how God does emphasizes hate. He and the people with him, including children, held picketing signs that said awful things. A few read, “Matt in Hell”, “No Special Laws for Fags”, and “God hates Fags”. the funeral everyone went home including Fred Phelps but it would not be his last appearance. On the trial date of Russell Henderson, Fred Phelps once again appeared. With the same sign and bring new people, still children were involved. What hit me the hardest about the signs were the signs the kids were holding, in particular the young boy in front by Phelps. The sign he was holding read in all caps, “USA” on the top of the poster, and “SIN” on the bottom and in the middle of the words, it was a vulgar picture of homosexual sexuality. This boy looked no older than ten. After Phelps’ first appearance, Romaine Patterson, one of Matthews’ friend, decided someone needed to stand up for peace and face Phelps. She along with other members of the community made angel costumes. The wings stood about seven feet high. They circled Phelps and they blocked him from the rest of the community. Patterson and the other angels stood there they did not speak but they portrayed peace and silence that was needed at that time. As, I watched the Laramie Project movie I felt disappointed and appalled to see that in his crowd of followers there were children holding signs of hate toward Matthew and toward the homosexual community. The children saw the angels but that did not stop them from being on the side of hate.
At this moment in the movie questions filled my head. How could anyone allow their child to be only taught hatred? Then I questioned, what makes people have so much hate? I believe that hatred is built into your being at a young age. I think parents instill all moral judgment and even if the child rebels in life once they are adult they will have similar views as their parents. I think that hate leads to violence and thus it can lead to murder. I think Father Roger Schmit said it best in the Laramie Project movie when talking about Matthew and the violence he received to the homosexual man and woman who were there to interview him. He said,
“You think violence is what they did to Matthew they did do violence to Matthew but you know, can I make this personal? Every time you are called a fag, or you are called a les or a, “a dike” yes a dike, you realize that is violent that is the seed of violence and I would resent it immensely if you use anything I said to somehow cultivate that kind of violence. “Well thank you father for saying that”, just deal with what is true, you know what is true. You need to do your best to say it correct”.
I think this quote is significant to how hatred is spread. Image kids hearing their parents, their role models, or even just older kids saying hurtful things, they will think that it is alright to say those kinds of thing when it is not acceptable. Hurtful words lead to hurtful or even violent actions. I think that the mental perception of children on people of another is race or another view of life is not noticed until someone being older, their parents mainly, tell them. Judy Shepard stated, “Hate is a learning behavior. Your voice is the most powerful tool in erasing hate”.
There is psychological evidence that shows that development of morality begins at an early age. “Prejudice is fostered through a belief that individuals of another group are homogeneous; working at changing that belief can be effective in reducing prejudice (Bigler and Liben 1993)”. In the article Racial Perceptions of Young Children: A Review of Literature Post-1999, it states that stereotyping begin from birth and until age seven. Meaning that the child will remain prejudice against people that do not look or act likes them until seven. Some children will not always hold the prejudice while others will, yet after age seven they start understanding social norms and what is acceptable and what is not. At this point in the child’s life is when the stereotyping either farther or ends. “Usually, by 8 years of age, children begin giving personal belief responses that diverge from dominant stereotypes (Aboud 1988)”. This means that the children that were with Fred Phelps picketing were forming their minds to think that it is acceptable to bash on homosexuals, and even hate them. I think that this is absurd. No child can make up their minds on such a touchy subject by themselves at age seven or eight. Those childrens parents have hate instilled in them probably from their parents and now are making decisions, like hatred towards homosexuals, for their children. I believe that this hatred that is built up with ignorance and lack of awareness is what leads to violence.
Violence like Father Roger Schmit said can be just saying words all the way to what Matthew felt the day he was beaten to his critical condition and left to die. Yet, I still believe that even when told that prejudice is right, one can still change. I think that this change comes from education and knowledge about the subject. An amazing example of this is in the Laramie Project. A student at the University of Wyoming auditioned to win a scholarship with a part of “Angels in America”, a play about homosexuality. His parents criticized him and did not even come to his performance. Later at the end of the movie we see this student again. The University of Wyoming decided to do “Angels in America”. When his parents asked about if he was going to try out for it he said, “Yeah I am, and a huge argument, alright it was like a huge argument. My mom was like, you know homosexuality is a sin, homosexuality is a sin”. He had just been in “Macbeth”, and he was a murder in it and he said to his mom, “Mom, I just played a murder tonight and you didn’t seem to have a problem with that”. In today’s society homosexuality is becoming more accepted and thus I feel like it will just get better through the years because of parents being accepting. This transformation from complete homophobia to mostly accepting homosexuals has come a huge way through education and cases like Matthew Shepard.
In the end, due to watching the Laramie Project, and learning about Matthew Shepards’ case I realized that hate is not something that grows as you make your own opinions. Hate is something that is presented to you right when you are born. Hate was infused in the minds of Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, when they beat and tied Matthew to that fence that night. Hate is in people’s minds when they speak hurtful words. Hate fills our minds at birth and as we grow we must learn to erase hate and love.