[ SECRET POST #2284 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2284 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 015 secrets from Secret Submission Post #326.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - random porn ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Mancester Police now consider attacks on Goths etc Hate Crimes

[childings.livejournal.com]

I don't know, I think this is pretty silly myself. Certainly crimes against people of these subcultures should be taken seriously but hate crimes, really? It's fucking music and fashion and the majority of teenagers and people in general don't stick to goth/emo/punk lifestyles for life so it's not in the same category as sexual orientation or gender, what the fuck

Re: Mancester Police now consider attacks on Goths etc Hate Crimes

[(Anonymous)]

They're clearly self-evidently different categories, but religion?

That's the one that messes it all up. Either you open the floodgates, or you kick it from the protected categories. Which given that the latter is politically untenable, leaves us with the former.

Re: Mancester Police now consider attacks on Goths etc Hate Crimes

[childings.livejournal.com]

Many religions have an ethnic or cultural aspect to them where even if you were an atheist you'd still be subject to discrimination, ie. Jewish people or Catholics.

Re: Mancester Police now consider attacks on Goths etc Hate Crimes

[childings.livejournal.com]

And you CHOOSE to be emo, goth, punk, whatever -- that's not something you're raised in like being Catholic or Jewish, where you're ALWAYS Catholic or Jewish even if you stop being Catholic or Jewish. So trying to put a subculture that's based mostly on things like music and fashion in a protected category is ridiculous

Mind you, I'm not saying it's okay to hate people or commit crimes against them based on whatever subculture they are a part of, just that it shouldn't be considered a hate crime

Re: Mancester Police now consider attacks on Goths etc Hate Crimes

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I don't like the emphasis on "you CHOOSE to be goth, etc." for a couple of reasons. First, it sounds kind of really victim-blamey, like if they didn't want to be targeted for this kind of violence, they should just give up this subculture/presentation that they've made a significant part of their identity (and yes, there are lifelong goths and whatnot). Second, I reject the notion that I'm ALWAYS going to be Catholic despite having walked away from the religion. Besides which, it implies that converts cannot be the target of violence on the basis of their adopted religion, even if they are dressed in a way that clearly identifies them as a member of that faith (for instance, Muslim converts wearing hijab).

For me, the defining factors of a hate crime are (1) that it targets people based on membership in a group that forms a significant component of their identity, whether innate or chosen, and (2) that it targets them specifically and solely because of that identity characteristic, in a way that implicitly threatens and intimidates all members of that group. It's that implicit threat that makes it a hate crime, and as long as the group you're threatening has a single, unifying identity, I don't see how it becomes a "lesser" form of terrorism if the identity is a chosen one.