Letters to the Editor
healthyskeptic
Published Letters: 671 Editor's Choice: 14
-
Larry Craig Deserved What He Got
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Larry Craig, what a hypocritical douche bag.
It's so typical of Family Values Republicans wound tight from their own guilty conscience about "original sin" and all the internalized guilt and hangups. Not that they're all gay, but a signifigant percentage of the most zealous seem to be over-compensating for guilt over homosexual urges and other sexual neurosis.
Take for example the recent surveys which show hetero anal intercourse is most prevalent among teenage girls in the bible belt. Fundies hoping to preserve their virginity and adverse to birth control. Ooops. Geeze, talk about unintended consequences and taking the back-door to sexual liberation.
PS, the subject of sexual neurosis, and neurosis in general, makes it appropriate to BS.
PPS, the Criag's list story is a perverse fantasy by someone with issues. It's filled with little contrived details and implausibilities that flag it as fiction. My guess about the author is the divorced 40ish guy, working at a night security guard, living in his mom's basement.
-
entrapment?
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It doesn't sound like the cop did anything to "entrap" him at all. According to the officer's account it was Craig who instigated everything. Though, in the age of mini-video recorders, all cops should carry micro-DV recorders on whenever they're investigating. Both for evidence against criminals, and to keep the police honest.
Also, that obviously isn't homophobia. Public lavatories are gender segregated to create an environment without sexual voyeurs and propositions. It would be no different or inappropriate if this was a hetero harassment in a co-ed bathroom. Bathrooms aren't an appropriate place to proposition people. That's common sense.
-
thought crime? No.
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The entire charge is one of a thought crime."
Nonsense. That's obviously and patently false. If all he did was think and fantasize to himself he wouldn't have a problem.
the crime is he made physical contact to play footsie and repeatedly reached into the next stall. He was clearly aware the next stall was occupied.
Had this happened between office cubicles it would be creepy and a disciplinary issue. But you never reach into the next person's stall or try and make contact with the next person. That's totally inappropriate.
If there had been an innocent explanation, like he was out of TP and was hoping to get more, and he thought the next stall was empty, OK fine. But clearly that's not the case. As the police report mentioned, he didn't even flush and I bet the toilet was empty.
-
- susan sunflower
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So what were the complaints ... that gay men were hooking up, making eyes, exchanging phone numbers and promises or that actual sexual contact was taking place in public?
There's a gay fetish sub-culture of bathroom & rest-stop hookups. Particularly among closeted guys. Apparently that airport bathroom was a popular spot. It's not just exchanging phone numbers, it's sex.
It's not homophobia to lightly criminalize it. The punishment he got was a small fine and a waring probation, which seems appropriate.
Bathrooms are gender segregated to prevent this kind of sexual propositioning among heterosexuals too. Allowing it would be asking for all kinds of problems like rape, indecent exposure, fights, used condoms, body fluids, parahenalia etc.
When a gay man enters a public bathroom he really should know better, and of course most do.
-
-- susan sunflower
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]was the point to respond to the "complaints" or to publicly humiliate homosexuals? ... gosh ... I wonder
Actually, if you read the police report, apparently they did everything possible to avoid a scene or causing him embarrassment. The plain clothes officer discreetly told him he was busted and they walked discreetly to the airport police police office. If the guy wasn't a winger Senator and complete hypocrite, nobody would have ever known. And the penalty was just a light fine and probation. Not harsh imo.
I don't see anything wrong with this sort of sting operation. It's a good way to put the word out it's not OK and prevent it from happening.
Gay sex is legal and there are plenty of places for it. Public bathrooms aren't one of them.
-
-- susan sunflower
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That rambling post didn't make any point.
This issue has nothing to do with gay rights. It is neither a gay or homosexual or heterosexual right to sollicit and then connsumate sex in public places. Doing so clearly violates the law and abuses the rights of others seeking to use the public bathroom as it was intended.
btw, I'm a San Francisco native. The bath houses in SF were shut down for public health reasons, because they were facilitating the transmission of a deadly disease. It would have been no different if it was a deadly flu epidemic or such. A fact that the majority of the gay community understood.
-
-- Janice78
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've been wondering how waving your hand under a stall is code for "let's do it"
He was signaling he wanted to jerk the guy off. That and a number of other actions he took were all common code for a hookup. People into that fetish learn the signals in chat groups and by word of mouth.
-
-- Xanthro
[Read the article: In the closet? Or just a bathroom stall?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So, a foot touching someone is now lewd? I'd better stay off the elevators.
What an idiotic comparison.
The officer in question responded in a manner that was designed to show interest in having sex.
Really what? Sitting in a bathroom stall?
Interest in sex should not be against the law.
Actually, in a public restroom soliciting sex is lewd and infringes on the rights of others including using the bathroom, including children. It's also unsanitary.
If Craig would have said, "I'll blow you in the stall" I can see the citation for lewd behavior, because the activity in question would have been lewd because it is public.
He did. The hand gesture he gave was code to jerk the other guy off. Unless you like stepping in other people's semen...