Three lesbians in Boston, Massachusetts have been charged with a hate crime for allegedly beating up a gay man. The assault took place last Sunday at a Boston subway station when the gay gentleman supposedly bumped the three women with his backpack in the subway stairwell. The three-on-one altercation resulted in a broken nose for the gay guy.
Felicia Stroud, Erika Stroud, and Lydia Sanford have also been charged with assault and battery with intent to intimidate. The gay guy claims that the women punched and kicked him and shouted homophobic slurs. Considering the fact that the guy ended up with a broken nose while the women seem to have survived without a scratch, certainly gives credence to the man’s story. And the women don’t seem to be denying the attack. Instead, their attorneys are focusing on the homophobic hate crime allegation, taking the stance that lesbians can’t be charged with a gay hate crime.
But there is another interesting twist to this Bostonian hate crime saga and it involves the little knotty nugget of human ethnicity known as race. Mug shots of the three lesbians clearly show that they are African America. But intriguingly, the mainstream media have failed to mention the race of the gay male victim who has remained unidentified in all the major press releases covering this story. Alternative media sources, however, are insinuating that the victim is white and state that the lesbians are claiming that the gay man yelled racial slurs at them when the bumping incident occurred thus provoking the violent response from the women.
According to Sanford’s attorney, Helene Tomlinson, argues that since her client is “openly identified” as a lesbian, there was no homophobic conduct warranted. Instead, she says, the alleged victim “provoked” the women by using racial slurs. Advocate
There may definitely be a case against the three lesbians for assault, considering the man’s injuries. But to charge these women with a hate crime for supposedly shouting homophobic slurs during the assault and basing that charge solely on the word of the gay man, seems an outrageous bit of political posturing on the part of the prosecution. Without witnesses to the altercation, why are the police and the prosecution accepting the gay guy’s statement as fact? His injuries certainly prove he was assaulted, but beyond that it’s he-said, they-said. Hmmm, seems like the Hate Crime Menu up in Boston right now is serving up a hot blue plate victim-hood special featuring a nice dollop of gay pandering pudding.
What an unfair farce hate crime legislation has become. If the use of so-called ‘homophobic’ slurs between gay men and lesbians constitute the defining moment that distinguishes a brutal case of assault and battery on the one hand from the uber-ultimate crime of ‘hate’ on the other, then I think there are one hell of a lot of lesbians and gay men out there committing crimes of hate on a regular basis.
Misogyny is alive and well in the gay men’s community and the anti-male meanness that characterizes the lifestyle of many lesbians continues to be tolerated in women’s circles. Although many lesbians and gay men have developed healthy friendships and quality working relationships with each other, there remains a truck-load of tension between the two communities. So when the fur flies among these homosexual siblings, the cunt and faggot phraseology gets catapulted back and forth across the great gender divide. Nasty though these verbal confrontations may be, should we now be characterizing these hate-filled encounters as criminal acts?
The three lesbians in Boston have been charged with assault and battery and those charges reflect a simple process of jurisprudence based on the facts presented. But charging them with a homophobic hate crime ceases to be about justice and sinks into the stinky murky mire of a politically-motivated act of malfeasance.