{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026573426573426574, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008391608391608392, 'mean_word_length': 5.016806722689076, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Death and Discourse: The History of Arguing Against the Homosexual Panic Defense

Beginning in the 1960s, American males began to plead the “Homosexual Panic Defense” (HPD) when charged with the murder of a homosexual male. Over the next 50 years, legal and literary academics decried the use of the HPD affirming that it relied on prejudicial stereotypes of “bad” homosexuals as sexual predators. This article revisits these critical debates and shows how these legal critics attempt to gentrify the “homosexual” into a good subject in order to justify his right-to-life. I argue that sexuality should never be considered a justification for murder, regardless of the particular homosexual’s status as good or bad.