Gay Violence Statistics
By Walter H. Schneider, April 1, 1998
The article shown below and my interspersed comments relate to the end of
affirmative action in California and to the concerns of the homosexual lobby in connection
Patricia Nell Warren's commentary hardly seems to measure up to the claim
of it being news. It is nothing more than more of the same old and tired G&L
rhetoric. The statistics she quotes are unsubstantiated even by data that the
G&L lobby itself is promoting. I'm sure that the people who have concerns that
they have their children subjected to homosexual propaganda in their schools are happy to
see Patricia Nell Warren being removed from the position of power that gave her so much
influence over the lives of heterosexual families.
L.A. BOARD OF EDUCATION TERMINATES
GAY AND LESBIAN EDUCATION COMMISSION
By Patricia Nell Warren
For the past seven years, while LGBT students in many school districts
across the nation were struggling for the tiniest toe-hold of acceptance, those in Los
Angeles Unified School District actually enjoyed significant acceptance and support from
their Board of Education. The Gay and Lesbian Education Commission a unique
body in American K-12 education was created in 1991 by the L.A. Board to ensure
that these young people could be safe at school and enjoy equal access to education.
GLEC became not only a pioneering example but a source of how-to
information, as gay people and concerned heterosexuals tried to enlarge their niche
in their own districts. Increasing numbers of GLEC's Project 10 and
elementary-school packets were being requested from elsewhere.
Now, LGBT youth in L.A. are not so sure of their Board's acceptance and
support. In a sweeping move that may jeopardize seven years of pioneering, the Board
is terminating all eight of its education commissions, including GLEC.
As per a resolution now before the Board, the commissions will be
"discontinued" on June 30, at school year's end. According to openly
gay Board member Jeff Horton, who spoke at a March 3 emergency GLEC meeting at district
headquarters, the Board will likely pass it.
It's not clear what the whole reason is for terminating GLEC.
According to Horton, the Board heard its legal counsel's warning about
Prop. 209, in which conservative Californians voted to end affirmative action in
California. A subsequent court decision had declared Prop. 209 constitutional.
[Proposition 209 is the legislation that made Affirmative Action
practices in California unconstitutional. It was brought about through a Citizens'
Initiative (a plebicite). It surely is comforting to know that there are some
democratic processes that can overturn the lobbying of minority rights special interest
groups. Just imagine what we could do with that if we had it available in
Legal counsel had advised the Board that several of its right education
commissions Gender Equity, African-American, Mexican-American, Asian-Pacific,
American Indian, Armenian-American might possibly be in violation of Prop.
209, >because they each serve a single group exclusively. GLEC and the Special
Education Commission are not affected by Prop. 209 because they serve both genders and all
ethnicities. According to Horton, the Board was hoping to avoid 209 lawsuits and
demonstrate political fairness. Dropping the gender and race-based commissions,
while keeping GLEC and the special-ed commission, would not have "flown
politically," Horton told the assembled members of GLEC.
However, at the Board's March 23 meeting, as the
"discontinuance" resolution was formally introduced, legal counsel told the
Board that, Prop. 209 or no, they have the right to ax the commissions if they so
Beleaguered by building-contract scandals and political attempts to
break up the huge district, as well as controversy over bilingual education and decaying
schools, the Board has not yet responded to protests. On 3/25 GLEC chairman Bart Verry
sent a strongly worded letter to Board president Julie Korenstein, asking that other legal
opinions on Prop. 209's applicability be gotten by the Board. Angry buzz about Prop.
209 still courses through California, and the new law's constitutionality may be further
challenged in the courts. The Board has also not yet responded to letters by
individual GLEC members including myself.
In place of the eight education commissions, the Board plans to appoint
a new Human Relations Commission. As yet, it is not clear how this new
commission will work, or if its members who may or may not be expert and sensitive
in all eight of the demographics previously concerning the Board can effectively
merge all eight umbrellas into one big umbrella.
Verry's letter addressed this concern. He said:
"The needs of GLBT youth are not addressed legally nor
constitutionally, as are the needs of persons from different ethnicities, genders and
physical challenges. We demand to have a voice in how the needs of our population
will be addressed. We demand that we will be actively involved in all
decision-making processes regarding the Human Relations Commission, so that [GLEC] will
have the space, resources and opportunity to exist as we do today. If this is not
accomplished, you need to recognize that there will be considerable risk of litigation so
that we can continue to address the needs of the GLBT community."
Already news of the commissions' fate has jarred many people throughout
L.A.'s ethnic communities, though the major media have yet to give the news any major
headlines. On 3/23 Frontiers Magazine published an editorial of mine. In
the city's gay community, the Board's quixotic move is pondered by students,
teachers, district employees, educators, as well as GLSEN and PFLAG groups.
"What's going to happen to us now?" one lesbian student
asked me. "Who can we trust? Why is the Board doing this to
For better or worse, LAUSD is a bellwether among U.S. school
districts. What happens here, often happens elsewhere later. With a vast
smoggy geography stretching from South-Central slums and "East Los" barrios to
all-white San Fernando rural districts it is the nation's 2nd largest.
Of its 650,000 students, an estimated 65,000 might be gay, lesbian, bisexual
and transgendered. Add perhaps 15,000
runaways, who come to L.A. from other cities many of these are LGBT kids who are
homeless because of family hostility and try to get back in school after arriving in L.A.
[Homosexuality is an acquired behaviour for most people who are
afflicted by it ("born with it," "genetically disposed to it" -- or
whatever you prefer to call it, in the absence of any valid supporting evidence that it is
anything more than a choice). Eliminating the teaching of it in school may do a lot
to bring the acquisition of that life style to a more normal level of the 3% or less of
the population that practices it. Think how much that would do to re-establish the
rights of the oppressed majority of heterosexual people. --WHS]
In 1991 the Board did the bellwether thing by creating GLEC to meet the
needs of this small army of LGBT students. Every year, hundreds of students,
both out and closeted, quietly find support in Virginia Uribe's pioneering Project 10, now
a counseling fixture in most LAUSD high schools. They could find information
on health, safer sex, suicide, substance abuse, family hostility, transgender issues, getting out of gang life
[How ridiculous an argument that is. When we still had more
functioning families, before we made homosexuality and other social perversions more
important than the creation of new functioning citizens within the confines of families
that still were impowered to do that, we didn't have to worry about homosexual support
groups providing "information on health, safer sex, suicide, substance abuse, family
hostility, transgender issues, getting out of gang
or be directed to community-based youth services for such needs as
employment, shelters, etc. They could enroll in one of the four continuation
programs for LGBT dropouts, and get their high-school diploma. They could attend the
Gay Prom, or the district-sponsored Models of Pride Youth Conference. GLEC's growing
scholarship fund gets a number of needy young people into college.
GLEC also held the line on safety at school. Young people who
were openly harassed can go to GLEC for legal networking. Because of the landmark
Jamie Nabozny case ending in a punitive million-dollar judgment against a Wisconsin
high school last year for having tolerated gay-bashing against one student LAUSD's
more reactionary schools are essentially on notice that, in a similar case, a California
jury might hold them massively liable for a student's injury or death from on-campus
[There is money in claiming to be a victim of a hate crime
considerably large sums of money not just for the victim but also for the lawyers
involved in processing the claim through the legal industry. To what extent do the
expectations of reaping large rewards for the status of being a victim contribute to the
frequency of hate-crimes? WHS]
While the eight commission directors' salaries were
paid by the district, GLEC funded its own programs almost $150,000 in seven years,
which we raised by everything from A-list fundraising parties to yard sales.
Are these programs effective? Because of them, numbers of
students whose histories are known to me are presently happier and more productive in
their high schools like Armond Anderson-Bell, 19, promising writer who is now
anchorman of the TV news station at John Marshall High School. There are LGBT
students in college or the workplace today indeed, who are alive today, even
reconciled with formerly hostile parents because of LAUSD support and
sensitivity at key moments. At some schools, the programs helped create a buffer
zone of gay-supportive straight students and teachers who feel strongly about human
rights. They produced some outstanding teen leaders and activists, including GLEC
youth commissioners Louis Harvey and Joel Feldman.
At her home school, Fairfax, Luna Andrade founded the first
gay-straight alliance club in the district. Dan Harris, a 1996 EAGLES graduate, went
home to his conservative high-desert community and forced his former high school to clamp
down on gay-bashing. Another EAGLES graduate, Christine Soto, has begun a promising
career in social work. Yet another, K. C. Barrow, went home to Utah to help start
the gay-rights movement in that state. These are just a handful of kids that I
know. Other commissioners can tell similar stories.
With the June termination date a grim certainty, GLEC
commissioners are bracing themselves for being "decommissioned", and for trying
to interface with the as-yet mysterious Human Relations Commission.
For the moment, some programs Project 10, the EAGLES
continuation programs will continue to operate because they were approved directly
by the Board. Friends of Project 10 will still offer its growing array of
scholarships. To better serve dropout youth, the special-ed EAGLES has just merged
with the Long Beach EAGLES to form a new program called Oasis. No matter what
happens, Bart Verry says he plans to hold the next Models of Pride at its usual venue,
Occidental College, in October. But it isn't clear what the future holds.
Will the new Human Relations Commission successfully meet the urgent
needs of L.A.'s ethnic communities? In the city where the 1992 riots and the Watts
riots happened, this is a major question.
Will the Human Relations Commission care enough about the needs of gay
youth to shoulder the full burden of GLEC's hard-fought programs? Or will some
members of the new Commission be people who willingly answer to right-wing
lobbyists? To keep our programs going, and launch new ones, will we be fighting
anti-gay attitude every time we need a majority vote? That's another major question.
Far-righters like Lou Sheldon and Pat Robertson have already targeted
LAUSD for major attention. The Christian Coalition has already actively tried to
keep Jeff Horton from being re-elected to the Board. Lou Sheldon attempted to target
our GLEC programs during a 1996 Congressional investigation, hoping to stigmatize GLEC as
an example of the "pernicious" influence of homosexuals in education. Most
local right-wingers don't give a hoot for the safety of gay kids -- they have lobbied the
L.A. Board about eliminating the district's hate-crimes policy. Their reasons: the
policy "protects homosexuals" and deprives Christian students of free-speech
rights to criticize homosexuality on their campuses. So the
"discontinuation" of GLEC might be interpreted by anti-gay elements as a
softening of the Board's position on anti-gay violence.
A recent study showed that Los Angeles has the third highest statistics
on anti-gay violence in the nation, with 350 murders, assaults, rapes and intimidations
reported last year.
[According to their own sources (quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle)
the grand-total of anti-gay violence in 1996 was as shown in the next two tables.
However, consider that her claim is not born out by the data presented in those tables
(it's their own data). L.A. is fifth in total number of alleged victims of twelve
cities surveyed, however, if you look at my appended comments pertaining to that table,
you'll find that on a per capita basis L.A., with an incidence of anti-gay violence of
1.7/100,000 Pop. ranks eigth out of the twelve areas that the table shows data on.
In relation to violent crimes against heterosexuals, neither the total number nor the
per-capita rate of crimes against homosexuals strikes me as being remarkable. What
makes violence against homosexuals so special that it must receive special
attention? Don't we have far more pressing problems to worry about? --WHS]
GAYS, LESBIANS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Source: National Coalition of
Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) [My full comments are appended at the end of this article.
Many more go unreported.
[So what? Many cases of heterosexual violence go unreported
too. What is unreported more than anything else is the rape of imprisoned men, who
are the largest group of people in our population being subjected to rape. The
number of rapes of male prisoners is estimated by some people to exceed by far the total
number of all rapes in the rest of the population. --WHS]
Nationally, violence against LGBT young people is on the rise. These
figures are augmented by growing violence even against students who are
gay-friendly, or who might merely be perceived as gay -- or who who are the butt of
cruel student pranks (it's the "in" thing at some schools to start a rumor that
so-and-so is gay or lesbian).
[Nationally, violence against all people is on the rise. It is
not a homosexual privilege to experience an increase in violence. --WHS]
Yesterday's shooting spree at an Arkansas high
school, in which two young teens clad in camouflage killed 5 people and wounded 11
in a pique over a girlfriend problem, points up a stark reality.
[The stark reality of that shooting has nothing to do with homosexual
issues, but rather a lot with the fact that at least one of the boys was forcefully and
against his wishes removed from the loving care of his father and grandparents and moved
into the care of his mother and her boyfriend who was convicted and served time for
possession of and dealing in drugs and for illegal transportation of firearms. The
stark reality is that the shooting is a manifestation of the destruction of our families
and traditional social values and that the rampant promotion of alternative
non-traditional life-styles has done very much to bring about that destruction.
The media is doing the usual handwringing about how TV violence and the
firearms industry are to blame yet we must look to others who are responsible for
violence at school. That certainly includes school boards everywhere, who for
better or worse set the tone for their districts. If a hail of gunfire can be
perpetrated by one angry heterosexual boy because he broke up with his girlfriend, a
similar hail of gunfire is possible over gay issues at a school where there is any level
of permissiveness on anti-gay violence.
In gun-happy L.A., home of the drive-by shooting, the Board of
Education's future performance on safety and welfare of its gay,
and transgendered students needs to be closely
Copyright 1998 by Patricia Nell Warren. All rights reserved.
The L.A. Board of Education needs to know that the nationwide gay
community, and concerned students and straight people everywhere, are watching.
So far, only a few letters of support have been received by GLEC.
It is vital for concerned Americans to pressure for GLEC's continuance, and a positive
performance by the new Human Relations Commission. Contact GLEC's executive director
Kathy Gill at 213/625-6392 (phone) or 213/626/5279 (fax).
The Board itself may be contacted by writing or phoning: Los Angeles
Board of Education, Room A-201, 450 N. Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90012, 213/625-6386
(phone) or 213/626-2815 (fax)
For more information on GLEC programs, its web page can be still found
Patricia Nell Warren is a widely read commentator, as well as author of bestselling
fiction like THE FRONT RUNNER, HARLAN'S RACE and BILLY'S BOY. She is a member of the
Gay and Lesbian Education Commission in the Los Angeles Unified School District, where she
helps raise funds for the scholarship program. Her publisher is Wildcat Press, whose
web page is located at www.wildcatcom.com.
This message has been forwarded to a list of individuals interested in
lesbigay youth and/or higher education issues. Please do not publish, or post in a
public place on the Internet, copyrighted material without permission and
attribution. It's fine, of course, to publish information in press releases.
Gay Domestic Violence Mirrors Society at Large
Battering as Common Among Gays as Straights 1 in 3
Gay Couples Suffer Battering, Study Finds
Elaine Herscher, Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle
Monday 6 October 1997
Most of the following article snipped. For full text of the
article refer to:
Quoted from the article:
"Locally, we are probably way ahead of any other city in
developing services," Merrill said. Several other agencies in San Francisco
have beefed up support services in the past two years. More counseling and support
groups have become available for gay and lesbian victims, and new agencies have formed,
including Queers United to Eliminate Abusive Relationships and Rape, and Women's Alliance
to End Same- Sex Domestic Violence Inc.
The San Francisco district attorney's office says there has been a 50
percent increase in reporting of same-sex domestic violence cases in the past year.
To handle such cases, the office has hired staff members, including Crystal Weston, who is
serving as an advocate for victims of same-gender violence.
The cities that reported cases for the National Coalition of
Anti-Violence Programs' study were San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, San Diego,
Minneapolis, Boston, Chicago, Denver, St. Louis, Cleveland, Columbus, Ohio, and Little
[The following table is from the article. The friend who
forwarded the article complained that the article lacked discussion of the causes of the
missing help for men who are victims of violence. He's right, but most of all I
wonder why so much of the article was devoted to a trivial issue and so little of it to
one that is far larger. Have a look at what I came up with. My comments are
right after the following table. --WHS]
GAYS, LESBIANS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Source: National Coalition of
Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP)
How much funding do these people receive? Whatever it is, at least a
good portion of it is wasted. Just imagine what could have been done with the funds
that went into all this. The following chart displays the data with additional
columns, to see the data in relation to the over-all population in the areas.
GAYS, LESBIANS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
-- Reported Incidents
I'm not certain that the
population figures relate to the "Area" mentioned in the article. I used
figures shown for metropolitan areas shown in Websters' Multi-media Encyclopedia.
figure. I couldn't find current data. I did find a figure of 2,225,000 from
1975. (No figure for Cleveland was given in Websters' Multi-media Encyclopedia.
From CHART 2 in the same article:
LEGAL STATUS OF GAY RELATIONSHIPS and how each state treats same-gender relationships in
1) Excluded - Same-gender relationships do not qualify as `Domestic'.
2) Uncertain- Same-gender relationships may qualify as `Cohabitation'.
3) Uncertain- Same-gender relationships may qualify as `Dating Relationship'.
(S) SODOMY LAW Currently on the books.
If the population figures that I used should be low, the ratio that I
described at the end of my comments becomes larger. There are a lot of grey areas in
the article. It is stated "The group estimated that
25 percent to 33 percent of partners in such relationships suffer verbal, physical or
sexual abuse. It based its conclusions on academic studies conducted from 1986 to
1997." The percent figures sound soooo much more scientific than to say simply:
"We believe that 1/4 to 1/3 of couples become involved in violence." It
isn't said what the "academic studies" were that they based their estimate on,
nor is is stated what degree of severity was involved in the 2,352 cases of gay domestic
violence that the table relates to. However, most importantly, it isn't said what
time-frame these figures relate to. Are these life-time risks or do they relate to
It is incongruous that the frequency of gay domestic violence should
vary to such a large extent and for no discernible reason from one metropolitan area to
the next. The reported rate of gay domestic violence per capita is 475 times greater
in Los Angeles than in Cleveland. Surely, some factors were overlooked or
deliberately ignored in the studies somewhere.
The legal status of homosexuality in a given state doesn't appear to play
a large role. If it were the controlling factor, there wouldn't be the large
variations from one area to another in the same state. So, why the long list of the
states showing their individual attitudes with respect to the legal status of
homosexuality within each state? What has that got to do with gay domestic violence,
unless that information is used to illustrate the lack of any correlation?
What may have played a larger role in the variations is how a violent
incident was classified and by who. Could it be that the attitudes of the reporting
organizations had something to do with the outcome of the tracking effort by "the 12
agencies that track violence against gay people"? Did the "12 agencies" use
a common standard for measuring? Did they use the same type of sources? Did
they all make the same distinction in determining degrees of severity or to classify an
incident as violence? How was the determination made in each individual case?
Who made it? Was it unbiased? Why didn't Elaine Herrscher ask any of these and
other questions before she wrote her article?
In view of the extremely large variance in the numbers reported it is very
likely that we deal with advocacy numbers that are biased to varying extent at each
locality by the people who are doing the reporting. If the rate of
"inter-spousal" violence is really as high as it is claimed, why make an issue
out of the extremely low rate of Gay domestic violence (on average 2 per 100,000 of
population during 1996)?
Advocates of special rights for homosexuals claim that perhaps as many as
10% of the population has the "homosexual gene." Not all of those practice
the various homosexual life-styles, which range from abstinence, through long-lasting
commitments between same-sex couples, to liberal promiscuity (as was the case with Patient
Zero) that may involve 250 and more sexual partners in a year with a thousand or more
copulations or sexual acts in total.
The advocates of special rights for homosexuals claim that as many as 3%
of the population are practicing homosexuals. Without knowing the proportions of the
three subclasses I identified, let's just assume that the 3% figure is true.
What we have then is that 3 percent out of 55,000,000 people are homosexual.
That works out to 1,650,000
The rate of reported gay domestic violence is 2,352/1,650,000 = 0.001425 or
0.1425 %, or about 1.4 cases per 1000 homosexuals in the year of 1996. Is that a big
problem that requires a lot of concern? Considering that no figures were provided to
support the concerns about gay-bashing in the first article above, should we really worry
about gay-bashing as an overwhelming concern at all?
Why worry about a problem that is virtually non-existent in comparison to
other far greater ones? The answer is: "To manufacture
concern!" Dr. Tana Dineen described the process of using advocacy numbers in,
and gave it a name that is the title of, the book that contains the examples she used:
Gay Domestic Violence An
If the data collected by the National
Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) is accurate, then gays comprise the sector
with the fasted growing rate of domestic violence by far of all sectors of the population.
Gay DV Incidents Reported in 12 American Cities
*Source: NCAVP, as quoted by Elaine Herscher in the San Francisco ChronicleMonday 6 October
** Source: NCAVP, as quoted by Susan Holt in an article in the Washington Blade 16 October 1998.
Male College Students — A Short Guide to the Truth, by Angry Harry
2001 02 01 (format changes)
2005 01 22 (format changed to new page design)
2006 03 04 (added link to Feminism for Male College