I have no opinion as to the intentions of the publishers. I'm Australian, and there are subtle cultural differences that confuse the issue.

What I do know is that from the comments, a substantial proportion of readers gained the impression that Larry King was stalking his murderer, and was guilty of sexual harrassment and even bullying.

To be perfectly honest, if I had only read the first few paragraphs and had no prior knowledge of this, I would also be under the impression that he was chasing around other boys, making unwanted advances on them, and one of them ended up shooting him.

Later on, it does talk about the hows and the whys of why he behaved that way, but I imagine descriptions of a boy with stilettos and nail glitter chasing around other boys sets off some negative connotations for some people.

I don't know; it just seems so focused upon his "flaunting" behavior that it isn't hard to see where people reading the article got that idea.

What most grabs me about the Newsweek piece is the set of observations about middle school-aged youth. I live with two of them--my children--and have experienced first hand how utterly irrational they can be about the most minute details of life. Clothing, homework, nascent romances, text messages, social networking, school yard gossip. Never mind the big stuff: bullying, precocious sexual behavior, drugs, alcohol, and dangerous/damaging choices affecting the rest of their lives. I have come to understand that what every middle school-aged young person needs, more than anything else, are engaged, loving and very attentive adults, whether parents, teachers, coaches, ministers, family friends. Some one or two adults to help young people make choices that affirm their identities without harming themselves or other people. In other words, good judgement and reliable feedback to help guide a young person through this most turbulent and terrifying time of life. Larry and Brandon both lost their lives that day, and seemingly, without adults to intervene on the tragedy unfolding in front of them.

This story grabbed me from cover to denoument.

When I first read the headline, I was thinking, "without a doubt this was a hate crime".

As I read further, however, I started realizing that this tragedy could have been prevented with several bi-laws that are successful in other schools. I know, because I am a teacher that helps enforce these rules in a public middle school.

The first bi-law that we have is that all kids must adhere to a dress code: blue or yellow collared shirts, tucked in, a belt, black or brown shoes, and khaki slacks. I work in a working class school where some kids wear the same uniform 3 or 4 days in a row. It is, however, mandatory for a reason: We do not allow students to show off fashion trends, seductive clothing,gang colors, or antagonizing t-shirts, etc.

"Flamboyance" (a word used in Newsweek)is not tolerated by either sex. Bullying is not tolerated by either sex. Harrassment is not tolerated by either sex. Pupils at our school know these rules, and those who don't, learn them quickly.

This is not a case of freedom of expression. This is a case of allowing a student to make a mockery of an educational institution. This is a case of a student being allowed to be the "alpha" and creating a three-ring circus.

The principal and other teachers, without a doubt, perpetuated this behavior. Giving a dress to a student that is already loves antagonizing other students with his cross-dressing? This teacher assisted Brandon with pulling the trigger.

As for the real hate crime of Matthew Sheppard. Matthew Sheppard's murder was brutal, calculated, which entrapped a homosexual boy into a situation that he did not perpetuate. He never harrassed or was bombastic towards heterosexual males. He was an intelligent, successful student who attempted to spread tolerance and peace among those who drew the line between "sin" and "preference". He was a boy who was tortured without provocation. He, indeed, brought the law of "hate crime" to justice.

Bullies, regardless of sexual preference, as we have found with Columbine, are antogonists. They should, BY NO MEANS, be applauded or be praised for some sort of retribution. They, also, harm the structure and semblence of an educational institution. Students, such as these, in our school are usually suspended.

This is the end of my diatribe so take it for what you will. It is obvious that I am not a "gay basher" or require tolerance training. I do, however, enforce rules. Schools are not institutions for disruption or harrassment. This should not be tolerated by any student regardless of sexual orientation.

I just think that Newsweek's story is completely outrageous! I especially feel sorry for Joy Epstein. It is shocking enough that the support she gave to Larry would be seen as inappropriate, but it is utterly maddening that people would actually suggest that she played some sort of "role in his death". If she weren't a lesbian, she would never have been under such suspicion.

The Newsweek editor is a hypocrite when he accuses Larry of using his "sexuality as a weapon". Isn't that what we ourselves are doing when we dehuminize people for having a different sexuality than ourselves. It's like blaming a woman for her own rape, just because she dressed a certain way, or blaming someone who acts out against injustice, for "causing a disturbance", rather than blaming the cause of the injustice itself.

Dear Cathy,

At Unfinished Lives we’ve devoted quite a lot of thought to the Newsweek article, and after many readings we’ve wholeheartedly sided with those who see the Newsweek article in an unfavorable light. While you and others see a benefit to the high visibility of a Newsweek article featuring Larry King’s story (an opinion we respect very much, even though we see the issues differently), there are elements which make the article a liability to the entire LGBT community.

Newsweek’s editorial staff, and author Ramin Setoodeh, have produced a piece about the limits of tolerance. Through Newsweek’s lens, readers are led to conclude that Larry King made the mistake of overstepping a boundary that put his life in jeopardy. Essentially, the article seems to say, LGBT persons of all ages should know the limits to which they are free to be themselves or they risk Larry’s violent fate.

What the article fails to do is to say that murder is never justified under any circumstance. Never. No matter how much Larry King did, or did not, “flaunt” his sexuality, murder was not… and never could be… justified. The result is that Brandon McInerney (Larry’s assailant) received the larger share of sympathy in the article, while Larry himself was put under public scrutiny for his character and behavior.

We're truly glad for your perspective, and we’re grateful that you're providing a public forum at The Bilerico Project where all of us may discuss this tragedy. Otherwise, Larry’s voice might be lost amid a world of hurried days and rapid news cycles.

Respectfully,
The Unfinished Lives Project

There was much more gender bending going on in the schools back in the seventies: football jocks and weightlifters in pink polo shirts, gold chain necklaces, bum high shorts. Now all of this is considered shocking and homosexual flaunting if so much as one little boy dresses like this. The punnishment is death.

There is no room for creativity in such a culture.
I would suggest that America search its educational soul at what it has lost with its macho misogynistic and homophobic hip hop culture. Someone is behind this globalized fascist American dress code, destroying indivivuality and creativity. Murdering sissy kids--it's in vogue.