The classifications aren't based on the traits of the victims, but rather the bias/motivation of the offender. So they report whichever trait law enforcement decides that the offender's bias against motivated the crime.

Now, they only report 3 multi-bias incidents. So crimes in which there are multiple biases seem likely to be classified under only one of them. (How they define multi-bias incidents seems a bit strange; it sounds like each [criminal] offense can only have one bias associated with it.)

One would assume that they are registering these crimes based upon the motivating factor. A hate crime isn't a crime against an underprivileged individual, it's a crime against an individual in which the motivating factor is the prejudice of the attacker against the race/sexual orientation/religion/etc. of the victim. If a white guy mugs and robs a black guy because the black guy is just the first person he sees, it's not considered a hate crime. So if someone assaults a black lesbian, the crime is categorized based upon the motive. Was the person attacked because they were black? Because they were a lesbian? Or because they were just unlucky?

By the way, perhaps I'm biased because my brother has a disability, but that number, despite being the lowest by far, is fucking horrifying. It horrifies me especially because the real number is almost certainly higher - how many homeless people get the shit kicked out of them merely for being "crazy" or for acting in a way that confuses and enrages the ignorant?

As for the bit about crimes against women, via The Flaming Feminist. If you ask the average person on the street why this is (I tested this out with a few of my friends), they'll probably give you a confused look and say something like, "Well, it's not like there are all that many people going around beating the shit out of women just because they're women." To which you, being a feminist, might point out, "Why, there are literally thousands of cases of man-on-woman domestic violence every year. Haven't you ever watched cops? Or, you know, opened a newspaper? Or ever had any contact with any sort of news media?"

"Well sure," they will reply, "but that's not really because they're women. That's because in a relationship emotions run high and sometimes things get out of control/that's for person reasons, not prejudice/etc." It's not a hate crime - the man is beating the woman because of some specific problem in their relationship, not because he thinks that women exist primarily for him to fuck and whale on.

All of this ultimately stems from the deeply ingrained (so deeply that it's never even spoken) idea in the heads of nearly everyone in our society (men and women!) that in cases of man-on-woman domestic violence, secretly, even though it's not polite to say so, The Bitch Deserved It. The crime didn't happen because domestic abusers have a fundamental contempt for women. It happened because they have a fundamental dislike of their particular girlfriend. Some other girl would probably be fine with him. You know, if she was more devoted, more faithful, more attentive. Prettier. Less pretty. More willing to have sex. Less of a slut. Etc.

So basically, to answer your question - when people stop believing that The Bitch Deserved It. That's pretty much when they'll start being listed.

Well it's counted as a hate crime of a particular category when the motivation seems to be their membership of that category, I guess. So if a the attacker and victim are both the same race, the motivation is likely to be sexual orientation. If they are different races and the attacker calls the victim homophobic names whilst they do it, it's also likely to be orientation. But if they yell racist insults, or they had no way of knowing what their orientation is, then it's likely to be ethnicity. But I get what you're saying - what if they do it for a number of reasons? Or if there's no way of knowing? Does that equal two counts on the graph, or do they just guess? And if so, do they tend to assume one reason above others? That is, if the victim is a black lesbian, do they tend to assume her identity as an ethnic minority is more important than her sexual orientation, and write it down as a racially motivated crime automatically?

It would be very interesting to see how they collect this data.

I was just going to say that. It seems that women are only viewed as 'other' or 'separate' when it's convenient for authorities. When it comes to counting up hate crimes, though, these distinctions mysteriously disappear.

Freaking seriously. As though domestic violence and rape are motivated by something besides hatred of women. People just don't recognize it as such, they think it's an interpersonal crime, not reflective of broader cultural themes.

Oh, crimes against women are just normal. Certainly not gender-motivated.