11107951 Arthur Dong's documentary License to Kill offers the interested viewer an excellent opportunity to be informed about both the nature and motivations behind hate crimes which target sexual minorities -specifically gay men. Throughout the film, Dong introduces us to several convicted perpetrators of hate crime. The criminals presented are all male, and have been convicted with murder. The victims of all but one individual interviewed were gay males. The motivations behind these vicious hate crimes are varied, but a significant proportion of the criminals involved attempted to mitigate their actions by claiming some religious significance. This religious attribution is evident of "Old school homonegativity". Old school homonegativity states that negative actions taken against gay men and lesbian women are the result of religious beliefs, myths, or a strict adherence to perceived normality. Thus, these may be seen as chief motivations in the perpetuation of these anti-gay hate crimes. Many of the men Dong spoke with indicated that they saw gay men as weak and therefore, easy targets. According to theories concerned with hegemonic masculinity, the masculinity of gay men is seen as being on par with femininity and a destabilizing force against which dominant masculinity aggresses. The perception of gay men as weak and easy targets is likely an external expression of this aggressive attitude taken on by those who wish to reinforce -consciously or unconsciously- the socially dominant idea of masculinity while subverting those viewpoints which seek to challenge it. Dong's film highlights the negative effects of ignorance and the devastating outcomes which can result. I would recommend this film to anyone wishing to gain knowledge related to gay hate crime as well as those wishing to understand the social ramifications of hate crime in general.

The movie contains some fascinating interviews with men convicted of sexual orientation based hate crime murders. The director details the nature of their offenses and probes the motivations for their crimes. While some of the descriptions of the crimes are horrific, and the lack of remorse for their actions and lack of empathy for their victims expressed by some of the perpetrators is disturbing, the movie is engaging and revealing. The central theme of the movie as expressed in it title "Licensed to Kill" is well-developed throughout the course of the film as various individuals express their rationale as to why they believed it was "okay" to kill gay men. The film provides interesting insights into the motivations for sexual orientation bias crimes, and would be particularly useful for educational activities and classroom study.

11037421 Licensed to Kill is a raw look at American homonegativity in the 90's. After being assaulted, Arthur Dong showed incredible bravery, having the courage to look these aggressors in the eyes and ask why; and the courage to listen to the responding lack of remorse, and in some cases pride, these individuals took from their crimes. Dong must be very strong to have been able to sit back and listen to these men spew disgust for gay men and excuses for their crimes when in reality there is no excuse for killing someone over their sexual orientation. The word "kill" written in a murder victim's blood is a potent image that epitomizes the hatred inherent in these acts. Reflecting on this image days later one still feels the blood-lust emanating from that wall. This appalling violence is seen in a more clandestine version through the story of William Kiley; after being brutally beaten by a teenager his neighbors did not phone the police but instead scorned Kiley for spraying his attacker with water. It is not hard for the viewer to connect the dots and consider how one lesser offense against a gay man can escalate into full blown murder. Comprehending how and why person would commit such offenses is beyond difficult but the film endeavors to show just that. Some of the men utilize vengeful Bible verses and myths of pedophilia to justify their crimes. Very few express remorse, other than being frustrated with the inconvenience of going to prison. Jeffrey Swinfold exemplifies this notion stating that his "taking care of" a gay man "is one less problem the world needs to deal with". The shocking yet fascinating overt homonegativity shown in this film leaves the viewer pondering what has changed in the 16 years since the films release. 11037421