In a forceful dissent, Justice Margaret L. Workman, joined by Justice Robin Jean Davis, criticized Loughry for giving the shortest shrift to real critical thinking. The majority decision, Workman wrote, is overly simplistic and constricted, because the absence of
those two magic wordssexual orientationdoes not definitely resolve the question presented by this case. In reality, Workman explained, certain individuals are targeted for violence because they are perceived to violate socially-established protocols for gender and sex roles. The perpetrators in such instances have drawn conclusions that the victim has contravened certain unspoken rules regarding men and women. When he acts on those conclusions, the bias-motivated crime is committed, quite literally, because of sex. Workman elaborated:
If a man stands on a corner kissing a man and is beaten because he is kissing a man, has he been assaulted because of his sex? Yes, but not simply because he possesses male anatomical parts; rather, the crime occurred because he was perceived to be acting outside the social expectations of how a man should behave with a man. But for his sex, he would not have been attacked.
