[sxmprivateeye.com]

The article basically criticized grandstanding the situation to promote a political agenda. How can anyone argue with that; it's true.

Ed

Ed,

It's amazing how much filth you're willing to wade through to find one kernel of politics to argue.

mc

Ed- I would agree in principle with a few of the points and loath most political agendas from the left, having been called a homophobe on many occasions. (I don't really care who's gay or what they do together, but when pressed on the issue I'm willing to say I personally find it "untasteful".)

If the leaders of the island made it know that the island is very conservative and frowns heavily on Homo-lemonadeuals, than parts of the article might have been reasonable. However, St Maarten actively promotes itself around the world as "gay-friendly" in hopes to attract income. You can't lure people here on the promise of tolerance and then beat the hell out of them when they arrive. ( and much less do so at a sushi place. I love sushi, but it is argueable the most gay food ever.. I'd bet money the attackers had the ribs..)

I also found the language to be almost comically immature. After reading "faggots.. homos.. queers.." (probably not the envisioned use for the thesaurus fxn on word..), the writer was almost seems like a 5th grader excited to be in health class because he gets to say 'pen1s or vag1na' in every sentence. It seems to me that the article was written by an idiot and one of the more educated editors added bits of reasonable political insight to make it seem like less of a rant.

It didn't strike me as the most professional piece ever written, either. However, it depends on whether it was written as a news report, or essay form editorial. I've read some pretty rough stuff by established left wing americam journalists; who write under the cover of an essay (their opinion), and use "popular" language without apology.

I really don't see a big difference in the original poster's writing style, and the St. Maarten editorial writer's style. Actually, they're both using negative labellng, equally. They're on opposite sides of the spin, that's all.

If some people think that the editorial was outrageously unsympathetic to whatever they read into the comments, the same could be said of the victims comments; with their media machine trashing St Maarten.

Tell me the difference, in style and hyperbole, between these victims calling everyone (who doesn't stand behind their political agenda) a homophobe and gay basher, and what the editorial writer had to say.


Also, these "terms/name calling" seem to be part of the public debate. The writer isn't introducing these terms and social history, but merely recognizing and pointing them out.




Ed

True. I grant a good bit of the origional writer's rhetoric is bit much. I’d be more critical of his accusations and style had it not been for his obvious and unavoidable emotional connection to the event. It was his blood all over the streat.. so I'm give him some le-way.. Had I worked for the paper, I might have suggested someone else cover the topic to avoid that perception (or maybe they knew this would give him more "room over the line" and decided to let him run with it?..) I’d certainly disagree with St Maarten being homophobic. I’d rank it as one of the more tolerant places out there. I think the victims just happened upon a few violent maniacs that no doubt should have been locked up for something similar years ago.

That being said, a good number of very conservative people on and related to the island (myself included) are fully willing to support more exposure to the lack of police activity and competence. I’d balk at the idea of incorporating “hate crimes”, as I think they place more value on the lives of certain groups over another. I’d like to see universal strict enforcement of laws for gay victims as well as “just plain old white guys.” Hopefully it won’t come to this type of infighting. The end solution/goal in a lot of people’s mind seems to be serious restructuring and policy changes of the local police force. If this makes for strange bedfellows in the cause, so be it.

I'm heading to St. Martin in a week and a half, for my 10 year anniversary, having been there with my wife 12 years ago when we first met.

I quite enjoyed the island last time we were there, and hope not much has changed.

But - that's neither here nor there when reading the Today editorial.

The article asks "who was really wrong?" presumably saying that gays kissing in public should expect to be beaten to death.

Blah blah blah, yeah, the extreme liberal left is just as bad as the conservative right on throwing out slogans and championing their pet causes with gusto.

However; let's be clear - there is no justification for attacking and beating another person, in any degree - be it a punch to the nose or a tire iron in the head, or running someone down with a car. The only reason I can think of is if they hit you first, or if they were harrassing a child/minor.

If you think the editorial says anything more than "it's too bad Americans have forced the world to behave civily to people, everyone should be able to find someone who they think is gay, and is smaller than they are so they can be sure to be able to beat them up," then I'm not sure what you're reading.

I think of the implications; so, it's ok to rape that girl because she was wearing a bikini. Oh, it's ok to beat up that black guy because he's black. Or that white guy because he's white.

"During WWII, it was common sport.." Hey, it also was common sport to chase down blacks and beat and hang them. It was also common sport in WWII for Germans to kill Jews. In Roman times, it was common sport to put Christians in a room with lions.

My worry is this; if I was in that bar with my wife, and those four young men didn't like the look of me.. would they end up beating me to a pulp (or at least trying to) outside the bar? And then after that happened, would I have been ignored by the Dutch and French police, as if nothing had happened?

Take the gay thing out of it. That's the question that worries me.

Yes, you may very well be ignored by the police, on both sides of the Island!!! So when visiting St.M. one must be defensive and see to it, you use commone sence where you go, and your surroundings. Crime is rising, and has been, but being careless is when people ask for trouble... This is not your country, and having said that!!! It would be wise not to have anything happen, as your chances of justice are very weak.... And yes, this is not about gay, 0r American, as some might be stupid enough to think that any americans expect more than what justice has to provide, as the people that are on the Herald message board, that are already American haters, let alone a gay person... And I would guess than that they will not miss the downfall of American tourist, and the money tha! they generate!!! So just take care! and take your head out of the clouds.

Agreed. I think the “gay issue” was just a superficial,l yet obvious thing. I have a very hard tike buying the idea that this guy was some “perfectly normal, gets along with everyone at work, buys his wife flowers, kind of nice guy” that suddenly went nuts over seeing two guys making out and offending his “oh so high ideals and culture”. I’d bet money that if anyone on this board had gotten into a miner fender-bender in the parking lot with him, it would have been vastly different than the average calm “exchange insurance info and chat while the cops are coming scenario” that we all have been through.


As for the cops, they may not like gays, but they seem to not like “doing their job” in general. Go back a few posts and link up to the article of the med students being attacked or virtually another post about crime. The laziness is hardly confined to gay callers. Gays just happen to be a population more excitable and apt at promoting issues. I hope they keep it up. A few more lunatics off the street in SXM is a win/win situation for everyone.

ed,

just want to congratulate you for your powers of reasoning and deduction in reference to the TODAY editorial on the gay-bashing incident. i think all of your points are well taken and that some of the people who show a vicious streak in their emails just might be closer to the thinking of the gay bashers than they might imagine. the gay and lesbian alliance leaders are doing what the black panthers and brown berets did so successfully in the 1960s and 70s. they overstate a case to get attention from the media and the public, and they do it to increase their power and exposure.
until the facts come out on this case in a trial, everything is conjecture.
nobody knows what happened in the room to precipitate the attack in the parking lot. what if something else happened inside bamboo bernies that will come out in a court hearing.
all we reasonably thinking people in st. martin are asking is for the outside world and those who visit here to give the facts a chance to come forth. and as i said in my original email, if you want to attack some country or island nation for harboring ill feelings toward gays, you could pick a much better place than st. martin. but if your purpose is to vent your spleen and your poison on somebody simply because you need to do it to salvage your own sick soul, so be it. some of you are doing a good job as evidenced by some of the hateful emails i have read from the gay community.

r. lanning

I vacationed on St. Maarten 3 glorious winters in a row until this incident occurred. I loved the beaches and the restaurants in Grand Case and Marigot.

I came back to the "Friendly Island" Forum because a friend stopping there on a gay cruise asked me to recommend a gay-friendly church. Reading this thread, I am reminded how bigoted and hateful I found not only the Today editorial but also the responses of some of the people on this board.

You may not like gays but you know what? I don't like YOU very much, Ed and Neo and Rick Lanning.

I haven't been back, and I doubt I ever will. I'll tell my friend to stay on the ship.

Give my regards to Lotierie Farm and Mario's Bistro, my two favorite restaurants, and to the Full Moon Party at Kali's Beach Bar.

Your hate has driven me away.

I wonder why was this post brought back to life a year after the last post?
it seems to me to be a way to instigate trouble.
and, Jeff , with all due respect, it is not fair to condemn the whole island because of the actions and comments of a few ignorant people.
however, rather than allow a warto start again, I am closing the thread.