• chrischryse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Just curious, while I don’t condone violence is there a difference between this and normal defense?

    Like say someone of the same gender tried touching me and was trying to come on to me and wouldn’t stop can I shove them away as I would someone of the opposite gender?

    • Eccentric@sh.itjust.works
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t think shoving someone is going to end up in court unless it’s a super unfortunate situation where you shove someone and they trip and fall and hit their head and die or something.

      The article doesn’t go into detail what specifically defendants alleged when invoking the law, but it does say it’s similar to a temporary insanity plea. So “I was so enraged by the fact that a gay came on to me that I killed them”. Which is a little extreme. Imagine every woman that’s ever been hit on by a man they didn’t like just attacking with the intent to kill. Just unreasonable all around to allow that as a defense

    • tygerprints@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Violence can’t be condoned or forgiven. And no gay person is going to try and come onto you and touch you unless you were clear about giving unmistakable signals about wanting that. No gay person would waste their time with someone that they know is not interested in them. And what’s so hard about just saying, “Hey I’m not into that,” if someone DID do that. Why are so many men quick to act out of anger and violence, instead of reason and a little human compassion. It should not be that hard to be civilized and mature people.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The difference is degree of escalation. In your example it’s “I was being sexually assaulted” and in the gay panic defense it’s “I interpreted reasonable but unwanted flirtation as danger and responded with violence.” It’s generally used in situations where as a woman if I attacked a man I’d assume I’m getting arrested.

      Now personally I have mixed feelings on banning the defense. It never works and so I think bar associations should condemn it in the same way they should condemn any defense by confessing. But I also do think it should come with additional punishment, not because “how dare you defend yourself like this” but because you’re confessing to it being motivated in bigotry. It’s “it was self defense I swear, what happened was [confession of it being a hate crime]”