Student kills self after web cam'ed with male lover

Min

What the flatmates did was totally wrong, what the person who killed himself did says a lot about how he viewed what he was doing - it brought shame and embarrassment that he couldn't live with when it became exposed.
It is what he was caught doing that led him to killing himself, we have not heard anything about the man he was having sex with, he seemingly didn't take such drastic actions.

There is probably something to charge the flatmates with, like invasion of privacy.

AnnyHallsal

The analogy doesn't hold up. There's no shame attached to being a chef. There's still a lot of homophobia around. I know a number of people who have been disowned by their families because of their sexuality. No-one has the right to expose anyone's sexuality, nor should they. And as Windsock said, if someone put a film of me having sex on the internet I would be bereft.

General Zod

WindSock wrote: »

Filming anyone having sex without their consent and sticking it on the net, is beyond a prank, imo. It's a horrible thing to do to anyone.

I never said it was not a horrible thing to do, because it was. If they engaged their brain for more than a second they might have realised that, instead they didn't and now have to deal with the consequences.

Snowie

its dissgusting that two people made him feel, that ashamed of who he was that he ended his life.

prinz

AnnyHallsal wrote: »

The analogy doesn't hold up. There's no shame attached to being a chef..

Tell that to the dead chef.

The circumstances in the OP are appalling. My thoughts are with the young lad and his family, and yes even with his friends who I am sure never foresaw the outcome. They do however have a lot to answer for, absolutely thoughtless, disgusting behaviour regardless of the sexes involved.

On the other hand there's no need to start waving the rainbow flag either. 4 gay teens killed themselves in the US in September....I wonder how many teens killed themselves in the US altogether in September.

strobe

General Zod wrote: »

I never said it was not a horrible thing to do, because it was. If they engaged their brain for more than a second they might have realised that, instead they didn't and now have to deal with the consequences.

I'd say it's more likely they realised completely that it was a horrible thing to do but just did it any way. I don't buy the "they thought it was just a fun prank and the guy would get a big kick out of it" thing for a split second. It's nonsense.

General Zod

prinz wrote: »

On the other hand there's no need to start waving the rainbow flag either. 4 gay teens killed themselves in the US in September....I wonder how many teens killed themselves in the US altogether in September.

ok, there has been 4 public cases in the US in September alone of kids killing themselves because of gay related bullying. There's probably a very large percentage of teen suicide in the US related to the same subject that may well not be as public, for whatever reason.

highlighting this isn't "waving the rainbow flag", whatever that means, it's waving a warning flag for a very real problem in society.

gizmo

Morlar wrote: »

There was a chef who also killed himself this week after appearing on gordon ramsey. I suppose that one said a 'huge amount about the position in society of vulnerable chefs' ?

A chef who appeared on the show three years ago and who was in a lot of financial trouble...

General Zod

strobe wrote: »

I'd say it's more likely they realised completely that it was a horrible thing to do but just did it any way. I don't buy the "they thought it was just a fun prank and the guy would get a big kick out of it" thing for a split second. It's nonsense.

nowhere have i said, nor have i read it being said, that he would have "gone along with it".

they did it for their own amusement (wether they realised that he'd be bringing a guy back, not a girl, is not known). but they still didn't realise he was going to kill himself over it.

Now, it was horrible sequence of thuings to do, both recording it, and by publishing it, effectively outing him against his will.

and they will have to live the rest of their lives with the consequences of their actions on their concience.

Plus, they should be charged with whatever laws are applicable.

General Zod

Min wrote: »

What the flatmates did was totally wrong, what the person who killed himself did says a lot about how he viewed what he was doing - it brought shame and embarrassment that he couldn't live with when it became exposed.

ah, here we go, the hate the sin, not the sinner brigade has arrived.

I'd say he killed himself because he didn't want to view how society would treat him, not what he would think of his actions himself.

joseph brand

Did anyone else get an image of Harold and Kumar? Going by the quote from one of the 'perps', they seem to have been doing it as a joke. Seriously, who would have thought the victim would throw himself off a bridge?

It was an awful thing to do, but we all know that some people take jokes very bad. For others, it's water off a 'proverbial' ducks back.

Besides, I can't see someone being found out to be gay, being such a big deal these days.

IvyTheTerrible

joseph brand wrote: »

Did anyone else get an image of Harold and Kumar? Going by the quote from one of the 'perps', they seem to have been doing it as a joke. Seriously, who would have thought the victim would throw himself off a bridge?

It was an awful thing to do, but we all know that some people take jokes very bad. For others, it's water off a 'proverbial' ducks back.

Besides, I can't see someone being found out to be gay, being such a big deal these days.

Firstly, videotaping someone having sex without their permission is not a joke, it's nasty and illegal.

Secondly, I'd like to meet people that would take having a video of themselves having sex being put on the internet "well".

Thirdly, being gay is not as easy as some people on this site seem to think.

ILA

It's getting hard to say this, but I think collectively we have to face up to the fact that we, as a society, need strong, unambiguous legislation to cover bullying of all kinds whether in school, the work place, or in general.

We also need to enshrine the individuals right to privacy, and have a clear set of penalties for it's infringement which would act as a deterrent to publishing or distributing media which you should already (morally) know that you shouldn't.

While I know this case took place in the US, it's just as relevant here. Sooner or later we'll be dealing with similar cases with the unprecedented and unregulated access to media and the technology to distribute it, even video files, in seconds.

This was a disgusting case, and thankfully they are looking at it from the perspective of a hate crime against someone of a different sexual orientation.

KINGVictor

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Firstly, videotaping someone having sex without their permission is not a joke, it's nasty and illegal.

Secondly, I'd like to meet people that would take having a video of themselves having sex being put on the internet "well".

Thirdly, being gay is not as easy as some people on this site seem to think.

Neither is been heterosexual, asexual or whatever!...life is quite complicated for everyone no matter the circumstances.

The major issue here is privacy.....absolutely nothing to do with with his sexual orientation.... the internet is awash of sex tapes of people that ordinarily will like to keep the act private. I think it is a chance for the judiciary in the US to nip this in the bud and set an example for prospective offenders.

Chorcai

KINGVictor wrote: »

Neither is been heterosexual, asexual or whatever!...life is quite complicated for everyone no matter the circumstances.

The major issue here is privacy.....absolutely nothing to do with with his sexual orientation.... the internet is awash of sex tapes of people that ordinarily will like to keep the act private. I think it is a chance for the judiciary in the US to nip this in the bud and set an example for prospective offenders.

When did you last get verbal abuse for being straight ?

moving along...

Morlar

ILA wrote: »

This was a disgusting case, and thankfully they are looking at it from the perspective of a hate crime against someone of a different sexual orientation.

It is not a hate crime. It is a violation of someone's privacy.

GreeBo

Kasabian wrote: »

Your right I was referring to that old doozie * Guns don't kill people. people kill people"

Guns don't kill people, people do.' But I think that the gun helps.

Millicent

Morlar wrote: »

It is not a hate crime. It is a violation of someone's privacy.

In fairness, neither of you knows the specifics of the case and the motivations behind the internet posting so you can't really say either way.

Morlar

Millicent wrote: »

In fairness, neither of you knows the specifics of the case and the motivations behind the internet posting so you can't really say either way.

It's not a matter of 'saying either way' - it's a matter of the assumption that it is a hate crime. That is an unaccountable leap in logic & therefore not of equal likelihood.

Millicent

Morlar wrote: »

It's not a matter of 'saying either way' - it's a matter of the assumption that it is a hate crime. That is an unaccountable leap in logic & therefore not of equal likelihood.

The bolded part was my point. As to the second part, you know no more about the motivations than the other poster so neither of you can say with authority whether it was a hate-motivated crime or not.

Morlar

Millicent wrote: »

neither of you can say with authority whether it was a hate-motivated crime or not.

Asserting that it was a hate crime without evidence is a flimsy proposition.

Saying that 'without evidence we should not assume it was a hate crime' is Not a flimsy proposition.

Those 2 viewpoints are not equal.

Millicent

Morlar wrote: »

Asserting that it was a hate crime without evidence is a flimsy proposition.

Saying that 'without evidence we should not assume it was a hate crime' is Not a flimsy proposition.

Those 2 viewpoints are not equal.

I think maybe we have our wires crossed here! I agree that you can't say it is a hate crime without knowing the facts. However, you said it wasn't a hate crime. My point was that, without knowing the full facts of the case, neither assertion can be comfortably made.

Sheeps

if only i gave a shit about something that some dude did to himself somewhere ive never been or plan on going

Millicent

Sheeps wrote: »

if only i gave a shit about something that some dude did to himself somewhere ive never been or plan on going

Not a fan of news then, no?

Should probably stay away from books and films too. :P

Sheeps

some moron jumping off a bridge because he was humiliated is not news sorry

Morlar

Millicent wrote: »

My point was that, without knowing the full facts of the case, neither assertion can be comfortably made.

You are wrong. It is not an assertion to say 'there is no evidence this was a hate crime'.

That is simply the facts of the matter.

delaad

KevinVonSpiel wrote: »

I'm guessing that Dharun Ravi and Molly Wei will live out the rest of their lives in fear... something I cannot say I'm that sorry about.

With any luck at all they will, until they're 90.

Morlar

Sheeps wrote: »

some moron jumping off a bridge because he was humiliated is not news sorry

This particular moron was gay so obviously it's a hate crime and therefore more newsworthy.

Millicent

Morlar wrote: »

It is not a hate crime. It is a violation of someone's privacy.

Morlar wrote: »

You are wrong. It is not an assertion to say 'there is no evidence this was a hate crime'.

That is simply the facts of the matter.

That's not what you said though. If you had have phrased it like you did the second time, I wouldn't have said a word. So I am not wrong. I was responding to your first post.

delaad

Sheeps wrote: »

some moron jumping off a bridge because he was humiliated is not news sorry

There speaks the soul of humanity.

Millicent

Sheeps wrote: »

some moron jumping off a bridge because he was humiliated is not news sorry

Morlar wrote: »

This particular moron was gay so obviously it's a hate crime and therefore more newsworthy.

There are issues of voyeurism, internet privacy, homosexual stigmatisation -- both personal and perceived --, the possible beginnings of a suicide trend, the utilisation of a social media site for a suicide note, depression, and the ending of a young and promising life. I'd call that newsworthy.

sponsoredwalk

Morlar wrote: »

This particular moron was gay so obviously it's a hate crime and therefore more newsworthy.

Why was he filming his friend?

On Sept. 19, Ravi appears to tweet, "Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into molly's room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay."

Ravi faces two additional counts of invasion of privacy for allegedly attempting to use the camera to view and transmit another sexual encounter involving the same student just two days later, said Kaplan.

I think hate could be considered a motive if he planned to film him again
and get more evidence of his homosexuality on tape, what other reason
would there be for a) publicizing his friends homosexual encounter and
b) planning to do it again to publicize it?

Sheeps

Morlar wrote: »

This particular moron was gay so obviously it's a hate crime and therefore more newsworthy.

lmao i assume this post is being sarcastic?

DeVore

The saddest thing is that we still live in a world where who you jump into bed with is sufficiently humilitiating that this man felt he would rather not live on.


If it had been a woman, all the jocks would have been slapping him on the back and cracking open another beer.


DeV.

Americangirl1

You should see the news in America about this story. They haven't talked about anything else. I personally don't like watching the news sometimes, the only thing that get recognition is the bad stuff, not the other WONDERFUL things or people that is going on in this world. And if it is something about someone doing anything nice, it almost always ends with someone freaking dying at the end.

Uhhh I think I shall lock my self away in a room and watch disney movies for a day and come out smiling. I'll make sure to leave Bambi off the list too, :P

P.S. terrible what happened to this guy, I think the people that did it will suffer not only by law, but hate or disgust from people.

jill_valentine

All of the coverage of this seems to focus on the fact that this was done via the dastardly internet, in a particularly mean-spirited bit of pranking, between a couple of lads.

Lookit, the problem is not that the kid was outed, or that the kid was outed in an unusually horrible way. The problem is that after he'd been outed, the kid could not imagine a future as an openly gay man. In the 21st century, in the first world, an educated lad could not imagine a future as an openly gay man. That's shameful and damning, and it implicates the entire society around him. Not the internet, not just his flatmate, not the big bad old bigots we're all waiting on to f*ck off and die; the entire society around him.

That's a much more terrible and pervasive problem than just a bunch of kids pranking each other, and it seems bizarre to me how little that is being discussed in the media. This isn't just a case of one kid acting like a douche to his roomie, as it's being painted - it's about how our society treats kids like Tyler Clementi every day. It's something I can't get my head around; how people of my generation and cultural ecosystem can look at this story and stories like it, recognise how awful it is, and then continue to casually bandy around gay slurs in unrelated conversation, as if there's no possible relationship between one thing and the other.

So I guess the moral of the story is that the next time anyone wants to call something gay because it's crap, or call somebody a f*ggot because they're a loser, they should have to think about how hopeless and alone that they, personally, helped make that kid feel before he jumped off a bridge to a cold painful death in the water.

jill_valentine

And as for the "gays are fine so long as they aren't actually gay" crowd, and the spineless yahoos trying to tell us with a straight face that hey, they're cool with gays, it's just that God thinks they're abnormal abberations who just choose to be like that because it's so easy and awesome, you guys might as well have been cheering him on when he stepped off the edge.

I'd like to think you have the wit to someday realise how grotesquely complicit you are in this and every other death like it, but I won't hold my damn breath in the meantime.

prinz

jill_valentine wrote: »

The problem is that after he'd been outed, the kid could not imagine a future as an openly gay man. In the 21st century, in the first world, an educated lad could not imagine a future as an openly gay man. That's shameful and damning, and it implicates the entire society around him.

Given the countless number of openly gay men and women out and about in the world today I'd say it implicates him and possible his family/circle of friends far moreso than the entire society tbh. I'd hazard a guess that this was causing him more issues than it would have caused others to know.

jill_valentine wrote: »

And as for the "gays are fine so long as they aren't actually gay" crowd, and the spineless yahoos trying to tell us with a straight face that hey, they're cool with gays, it's just that God thinks they're abnormal abberations who just choose to be like that because it's so easy and awesome, you guys might as well have been cheering him on when he stepped off the edge..

Who has mentioned God on this thread? I've looked but seems the first person to bring God/religion into this topic is you....

skregs

Stinger for him