In the late 1990s, three brutal murders of gay and trans-identified individuals shocked the nation, but only one became a defining moment in LGBTQ advocacy. The difference? Privilege, media access, and whose stories the public chooses to remember.
Brandon Teena was murdered on December 31, 1993, in Nebraska. A trans-identified female from a troubled, working-class background, he was raped and killed after his biological sex was discovered. His story remained largely under the radar until the 1999 film Boys Don’t Cry dramatized his life, though it framed his murder primarily as a gender identity issue rather than addressing the broader homophobia and misogyny that contributed to his death.
Matthew Shepard was killed on October 12, 1998, in Wyoming. A gay college student from a well-off, politically connected family, he was tied to a fence and brutally beaten. His parents, armed with media access and resources, ensured his murder became a national cause, leading to the Matthew Shepard Foundation and the eventual passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act in 2009. But while Shepard’s killing was widely accepted as a homophobic hate crime, later evidence suggested he was likely murdered over drugs rather than his sexuality—a reality that never gained the same traction as the original narrative.
Billy Jack Gaither was murdered just four months later, on February 19, 1999, in rural Alabama. He was lured from a bar, beaten to death, and burned on a pile of tires. Unlike Shepard, Gaither’s working-class family lacked the influence and connections to keep his story in the headlines, and his murder faded from national consciousness despite its brutal nature.
All three were victims of violence, yet only one became a household name. Their stories reveal how class, privilege, and media attention determine whose suffering leads to change—and whose tragedies are quietly forgotten.
Jimenez book is very important. If we had spent the money from the Mathew Shepard nonprofit on meth use in the gay community perhaps it wouldn’t have ravaged it so bad.
Wow, you can't even bother to spell his name correctly. Murder, like grief, is not a beauty pageant, & for you to trivialize it so subjectively & dehumanizingly is utterly disgusting & disrespectful to his survivors & loved ones, &, oh, to the concept of justice itself. I haven't read anything this offensive about human tragedy since that idiot suggested Humboldt mattered because its victims were white. Shame.
"Privelege", in a word & most obviously, you have no issue with historic murders being revived in SJW rankings? While simultaneously ignoring black deaths. You seriously think survivors don't care that their loved ones' names & memories are being exploited in online headlines years later? That is NOT the meaning of RIP. Of course misrepresenting hate crime into drug deal gone bad is trivializing, dehumanizing & very possibly factually incorrect. I can't say, unlike current historical revisionists, I wasn't actually THERE. Oh. They weren't either? So why are the jackals here to feast off memories of victims they didn't know & never will while simultaneously ignoring feelings of survivors? For profit? Attention? So Ryan Murphy can celebrate murderers still serving sentences? Or freaks can go full Menendez & campaign for their release? RIP, Matthew.
Oh, & oxycontin has had an impact in America that is unrelated to meth, so congratulations on trivializing those two tragedies also you unfeeling sociopath.
1. Not yet finished watching this, but just want to set Lisa's words here again:
"The entire infrastructure around me--I could no longer trust."
This. So much this, with respect to "gender" versus everything we know about humanity--as well as our current experience with evil streaming freely from both sides of our political house.
2. Myths can be useful, especially when they give children something positive to strive for. But if we cling to myths that cleave our world into good and evil, and declare ourselves permanently wedged into a position on the "good" side (and shore it all up with repeated declarations), we become not so much "enlightened" as "incapable of remorse." I think this is part of what happened with folks who imagined themselves part of the liberatory project ending up supporting everything from journalistic malpractice to evidence suppression to...well, butchery.
Adulthood means recognizing everyone's capacity to do harm, including our side's, including our own. It means being able to step back, feel remorse, course-correct. And I think our society is barreling toward infantilization.
Great podcast but you misrepresented GLAAD when it was created (1985). Co-founder Darrell Yates Rist was an old friend. Modelled on the ADL, Its purpose was to counter the flat-out anti-gay reporting on AIDS. They wouldn't recognize what the organization has become.
As to Jamie's query about why there is a rush to create a narrative in news accounts before the facts have been determined: breaking a story first used to be a big deal in journalism (maybe less so now); getting it out there quickly is the job of many or most journalists. Few get to write feature stories or investigate for lengths of time. The pressure to deliver may account for some of what happens.
Many academics have studied "news frames" and "agenda setting" in news--this is not a new problem. Which stories get put out? And how? "If it bleeds, it leads" is one standard.
Nowadays, I agree, stories that ensure that readers are able to identify the correct type of victim are more likely to be distributed. Would we have heard of this upstate NY murder case at all if there weren't a trans angle? I doubt it.
I look forward to each new episode of ID, because I always learn something new or, even more exciting, I learn to think about an issue in a way I haven’t before. Keep up the this thoughtful, honest conversation.
Your post and this video is not only offensive, it’s just unnecessary! I like most of what you post but this is cringe-worthy! Not ok 👎🏻 Have some respect! Even a shred!
Your post and this video is not only offensive, it’s just unnecessary! I like most of what you post but this is cringe-worthy! Not ok 👎🏻 Have some respect! Even a shred!
Did they actually exhume the corpses or just troll them online? Peter Cushing has starred in grave robber movies taken from historical cases, evidently there's still a market.
I was very interested in Lisa's comments about pressure on scientists to frame studies of sex differences through the lens of gender identity. Lisa, have you written about this? Seems like those interviews you've conducted over the last seven years are a very good start for an analysis of how gender ideology had shaped/skewed research...and consequently the narrative among "liberals."
If it's true, as Peter Boghossian once said, that "my side bias" is the bias that is impossible to overcome by presenting evidence, then I don't know how people will ever change their minds on this subject until it gets uncoupled from politics. I don't know how that will ever happen. The Trump EOs, and his gender-related remarks in his address to Congress, were certainly counterproductive in that regard.
People are gradually changing their minds about gender ideology as the body of evidence grows, but it will probably go by the way of creationism. That is, there will always be a select few hold outs, the ones who cling to the my-side bias that you mention. We still have people today who believe in and teach creationism. Belief in gender ideology will become rare, but it will never fully go away, just like creationism. The sad thing about gender ideology is that people are measurably harmed by it. Creationism is just a silly untruth that leaves people ignorant about the natural world.
Enjoyable episode as usual by the ID team, but Lisa…NH = meth? I thought we were myth-busting here. You’re channeling Trump 45 😆
NH is now the place where people in MA aspire to live. Relatively low cost of living, good quality of life, and beautiful scenery. (Lakes mentioned, points for that). PS, for anyone reading this, the meth state is CA.
In the late 1990s, three brutal murders of gay and trans-identified individuals shocked the nation, but only one became a defining moment in LGBTQ advocacy. The difference? Privilege, media access, and whose stories the public chooses to remember.
Brandon Teena was murdered on December 31, 1993, in Nebraska. A trans-identified female from a troubled, working-class background, he was raped and killed after his biological sex was discovered. His story remained largely under the radar until the 1999 film Boys Don’t Cry dramatized his life, though it framed his murder primarily as a gender identity issue rather than addressing the broader homophobia and misogyny that contributed to his death.
Matthew Shepard was killed on October 12, 1998, in Wyoming. A gay college student from a well-off, politically connected family, he was tied to a fence and brutally beaten. His parents, armed with media access and resources, ensured his murder became a national cause, leading to the Matthew Shepard Foundation and the eventual passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act in 2009. But while Shepard’s killing was widely accepted as a homophobic hate crime, later evidence suggested he was likely murdered over drugs rather than his sexuality—a reality that never gained the same traction as the original narrative.
Billy Jack Gaither was murdered just four months later, on February 19, 1999, in rural Alabama. He was lured from a bar, beaten to death, and burned on a pile of tires. Unlike Shepard, Gaither’s working-class family lacked the influence and connections to keep his story in the headlines, and his murder faded from national consciousness despite its brutal nature.
All three were victims of violence, yet only one became a household name. Their stories reveal how class, privilege, and media attention determine whose suffering leads to change—and whose tragedies are quietly forgotten.
Jimenez book is very important. If we had spent the money from the Mathew Shepard nonprofit on meth use in the gay community perhaps it wouldn’t have ravaged it so bad.
Wow, you can't even bother to spell his name correctly. Murder, like grief, is not a beauty pageant, & for you to trivialize it so subjectively & dehumanizingly is utterly disgusting & disrespectful to his survivors & loved ones, &, oh, to the concept of justice itself. I haven't read anything this offensive about human tragedy since that idiot suggested Humboldt mattered because its victims were white. Shame.
How is his murder being trivialized?
"Privelege", in a word & most obviously, you have no issue with historic murders being revived in SJW rankings? While simultaneously ignoring black deaths. You seriously think survivors don't care that their loved ones' names & memories are being exploited in online headlines years later? That is NOT the meaning of RIP. Of course misrepresenting hate crime into drug deal gone bad is trivializing, dehumanizing & very possibly factually incorrect. I can't say, unlike current historical revisionists, I wasn't actually THERE. Oh. They weren't either? So why are the jackals here to feast off memories of victims they didn't know & never will while simultaneously ignoring feelings of survivors? For profit? Attention? So Ryan Murphy can celebrate murderers still serving sentences? Or freaks can go full Menendez & campaign for their release? RIP, Matthew.
You’re exactly the reason they made this podcast. Thanks for playing.
Personal attack predictable default of troll lacking actual response. Oh, & I'm not "playing".
Oh, & oxycontin has had an impact in America that is unrelated to meth, so congratulations on trivializing those two tragedies also you unfeeling sociopath.
Right On Target 🎯 u.n.owen
I got the Stranger in a Strange Land reference. “Grok” is such a useful word.
We need state-funded mouse vaginoplasty, otherwise transgender mouse will commit suicide
1. Not yet finished watching this, but just want to set Lisa's words here again:
"The entire infrastructure around me--I could no longer trust."
This. So much this, with respect to "gender" versus everything we know about humanity--as well as our current experience with evil streaming freely from both sides of our political house.
2. Myths can be useful, especially when they give children something positive to strive for. But if we cling to myths that cleave our world into good and evil, and declare ourselves permanently wedged into a position on the "good" side (and shore it all up with repeated declarations), we become not so much "enlightened" as "incapable of remorse." I think this is part of what happened with folks who imagined themselves part of the liberatory project ending up supporting everything from journalistic malpractice to evidence suppression to...well, butchery.
Adulthood means recognizing everyone's capacity to do harm, including our side's, including our own. It means being able to step back, feel remorse, course-correct. And I think our society is barreling toward infantilization.
Great podcast but you misrepresented GLAAD when it was created (1985). Co-founder Darrell Yates Rist was an old friend. Modelled on the ADL, Its purpose was to counter the flat-out anti-gay reporting on AIDS. They wouldn't recognize what the organization has become.
As to Jamie's query about why there is a rush to create a narrative in news accounts before the facts have been determined: breaking a story first used to be a big deal in journalism (maybe less so now); getting it out there quickly is the job of many or most journalists. Few get to write feature stories or investigate for lengths of time. The pressure to deliver may account for some of what happens.
Many academics have studied "news frames" and "agenda setting" in news--this is not a new problem. Which stories get put out? And how? "If it bleeds, it leads" is one standard.
Nowadays, I agree, stories that ensure that readers are able to identify the correct type of victim are more likely to be distributed. Would we have heard of this upstate NY murder case at all if there weren't a trans angle? I doubt it.
I look forward to each new episode of ID, because I always learn something new or, even more exciting, I learn to think about an issue in a way I haven’t before. Keep up the this thoughtful, honest conversation.
Your post and this video is not only offensive, it’s just unnecessary! I like most of what you post but this is cringe-worthy! Not ok 👎🏻 Have some respect! Even a shred!
I heard a lot of feedback like this from trans activists. We should learn to #BeKind!
Euphemism to accommodate enables abuse
Your post and this video is not only offensive, it’s just unnecessary! I like most of what you post but this is cringe-worthy! Not ok 👎🏻 Have some respect! Even a shred!
They’re explaining the facts and varying media narratives around these murders. How is that cringe-worthy?
Did they actually exhume the corpses or just troll them online? Peter Cushing has starred in grave robber movies taken from historical cases, evidently there's still a market.
It’s a bunch of bored overly busybody self righteous online people stirring up gobbledygook !
Aka trolls.
Because I know what happened! And this isn’t true!
I was very interested in Lisa's comments about pressure on scientists to frame studies of sex differences through the lens of gender identity. Lisa, have you written about this? Seems like those interviews you've conducted over the last seven years are a very good start for an analysis of how gender ideology had shaped/skewed research...and consequently the narrative among "liberals."
We shall overcome someday.
Ben, as it was you assembling the Weekly News Roundup, of course you’re depressed!
If it's true, as Peter Boghossian once said, that "my side bias" is the bias that is impossible to overcome by presenting evidence, then I don't know how people will ever change their minds on this subject until it gets uncoupled from politics. I don't know how that will ever happen. The Trump EOs, and his gender-related remarks in his address to Congress, were certainly counterproductive in that regard.
People are gradually changing their minds about gender ideology as the body of evidence grows, but it will probably go by the way of creationism. That is, there will always be a select few hold outs, the ones who cling to the my-side bias that you mention. We still have people today who believe in and teach creationism. Belief in gender ideology will become rare, but it will never fully go away, just like creationism. The sad thing about gender ideology is that people are measurably harmed by it. Creationism is just a silly untruth that leaves people ignorant about the natural world.
From your lips to God’s ears, as the creationists would say!
Evidence>bias.
Yes, that's how it should work. That't not how it works psychologically, unfortunately, when "My Side Bias" comes into play.
Enjoyable episode as usual by the ID team, but Lisa…NH = meth? I thought we were myth-busting here. You’re channeling Trump 45 😆
NH is now the place where people in MA aspire to live. Relatively low cost of living, good quality of life, and beautiful scenery. (Lakes mentioned, points for that). PS, for anyone reading this, the meth state is CA.
https://www.al.com/news/2019/02/billy-jack-gaither-was-savagely-murdered-20-years-ago-today-because-he-was-gay-in-alabama.html
Billie Joe McAllister. He was fiction also.