I believe that, in such cases, two factors are at work:

1-The family gets to see everything that's good about a person as s/he's growing up, and on a day-to-day basis. It's probable that even the VERY WORST PERSON ALIVE behaves in a human-like manner at times--AAMOF, may even occasionally be downright pleasant. I'll bet that even the notorious Jeffrey Dahmer's parents could remember some nice things about their late son!

2-When someone commits murder and mayhem, "the public" tends to blame the perp's family for his character defects. So I can understand why someone would want to avoid being blamed for having birthed, and then raised, a "monster." (Note: One comment that I read recently described the custom in the People's Republic of China in which the family of an executed criminal is billed for the cost of the bullets used to kill him/her--the idea behind it being that the family did not do a good-enough job of raising the child that eventually became a criminal. In China, IOW, the blame is explicit, not just implied.)

I can sympathize the attitude that says, "Don't blame ME for what my family member did," but what I don't quite "get" is this seeming unwillingness to even blame the perpetrator him/herself for what s/he did. All too often--as is the case with Lovelle Mixon--if s/he's a member of an ethnic minority and/or if s/he's "underclass," then the "racist/classist society" may also be blamed for crimes that are committed by individuals. (AAMOF, I've heard that there are some comments on Mixon's memorial site that characterize his actions as being some sort of noble, self-sacrificing "armed resistance against the police.") But it's really, really helpful to remind ourselves that some outstanding achievers and downright terrific people have had the strength of character to RISE ABOVE difficult situations during their youths. FREE WILL IS REAL! If we've reached the "age of reason," and if we're not saddled with a medical problem that affects our ability to reason, then we have CHOICES IN EVERYTHING THAT WE DO, and we should be held (AND hold ourselves!) RESPONSIBLE for those choices. PERIOD.

A lot of information has come out about that so-called non-monster, Lovelle Mixon, since he was killed after murdering four cops. The least-bad of his "bad deeds" was that, in his young life, he'd managed to father (un-supported, natch!) babies onto numerous "baby mamas." From an early age, he was involved in seemingly innumerable offenses, both petty and major, including armed robbery, murder...AND the abduction, rape, and sodomy of several women--the most recent victim being a twelve-year-old child.

So, if he's not a "monster," Mixon family, then I'd like to know what adjectives and nouns YOU'D use to describe your late loved one. --Because I'd venture to guess that he had a lot more bad in him than good.

Why do his loved ones believe that he did what he did? They say that "He didn't want to go back to jail for his parole violation," but the District Attorney said that the term for parole violation would only have been six months. While I can understand his not wanting to return to prison, I believe that he had an entirely different motive. I know this BECAUSE *I* LIVED WITH A MONSTER ONCE, and it's given me insight into how that type of perverted mind works. This type of person has what I call an "infinite sense of entitlement," and if they're frustrated in their desires, in ANY way, they just want to "make the bastards pay." I believe that Mixon's TRUE motivation--which was stated by the monster with whom I resided--was that he wanted to "go out in a blaze of glory" by taking out as many "pigs" as possible along with himself.

"My" monster's family, like the Mixons, loved him wholeheartedly and wished to protect him from himself--no matter the potential sacrifice to themselves. And yet he once told me that any heroin addict (and by that, he meant "himself") would--quote unquote--"Murder his own mother if she stood between him and his next 'fix.""

I immensely despise gay-bashing, and homophobia in general. And, as a feminist, I also despise a social system that continues to put a stamp of approval on males' various efforts to make themselves feel "more-manly," dominant, etc.

But an intelligent person realizes that many aspects of the "old time" gender roles remain firmly entrenched and that many people continue to view male homosexual sexuality as being, somehow, "less than masculine." And, knowing that most men continue to be that way, and knowing that men's hormones tend to make them hostile, domineering, and ready to fight over their sense of masculine honor, WHY would a not-born-femle pre-op not disclose her true condition to a potential mate prior to meeting--nevermind giving the guy a B.J.? At the very least, a realistic person might expect a very hostile reaction to that sort of duplicity--most likely, a beating (hostile men regularly beat up both women and fellow men for far less of a perceived insult to their sense of masculinity).

So...no: I am NOT advocating murder as a "reasonable" reaction to that sort of deception. But what I AM advocating is a reasonable level of intelligence (not to mention of sense of self-preservation) on the part of a would-be deceiver--a level of intelligence that would keep that individual from going through with that sort of deception in the first place! After all, it's not as if a pre-op MTF cannot find love and companionship: There seem to be PLENTY of self-identified "straight" males who have a "thing" for "chicks with dicks." So why take a chance on someone who could turn out to be a homophobe of the most-vicious variety?