The Scarlet Newscast

I respectfully disagree Full disclosure:  I’m straight, but have served on the board of directors for PFLAG, and am about as pro-gay as a straight person can get.  I want gay-friendly education curriculum, legalized gay marriage, the whole shebang.  So my response is that of someone who is an ally of the gay community, not some asshat who hates gays.

But this could be seen as a public health concern, for one thing.  I believe that the majority of men who meet clandestinely for gay sex are likely living “straight” lives–they are likely married or otherwise in heterosexual relationships.  This means they’re likely risking the health (and lives) of their partners. 

If there were similar activity for straights — men and women hooking up at a local park for anonymous sex — I wouldn’t have a problem with THAT getting busted up, either.  If you’re dumb enough to try to fool around on the side in a public way (instead of the good old-fashioned way of renting a cheap hotel room or something similarly cliche), then you deserve for your partner to find out what is going on.

Plus, one could see these busts as a good (albeit embarrassing) thing:  Aren’t they likely to force some guys out of the closet?  Not that it’s doing them a favor, but… geez, it’s 2007 in one of the most gay-friendly places on the planet (relatively speaking). 

Should their faces be on the news?  No more so than anyone else who’s merely been charged and not convicted.  But the local police departments already post pictures, addresses, etc., of men busted for using prostitutes, prior to conviction, so how is this any different?  Personally, I’d like that whole aspect to stop, and for us to get back to “innocent until proven guilty.”  Certainly no man should lose his job simply for getting busted for getting on his knees in a local park, but his wife absolutely deserves to know what is going on, and if it takes law enforcement’s slightly-over-the-top approach, I’m fine with that.

And I’m all for making domestic abuse, drunk driving convictions much more public (I personally have one DUI conviction myself), so it’s not like I’m taking this stance simply on the sex angle.  Personally, I don’t think shame is always a bad thing.  It *can* be a good motivator for change.

Sure, public officials are completely exaggerating when they say local (neighborhood) safety issues are a concern (just gives them an excuse to be so sensationalistic about this acitivity), but that’s no surprise.  That’s police departments for you.

For the men who are gay and just have a fun little fetish for sex in the park with other men, well, I’m sorry they’re getting caught in the crossfire.

In a nutshell, if you don’t want to get publicly shamed (and busted) for having public sex, DON’T DO IT.  Frankly, my main concern is for wives/girlfriends whose health and lives are being risked when their men go trolling for anonymous gay sex, just as my concern is for the wives and girlfriends of men who hook up with hookers in Frogtown.

And that they continue to live double lives is ridiculous.  I know PLENTY of gay men who are out and proud and wonderful, and to whine about it being too “difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota” is disingenuous. 

You Misunderstand I’m not advocating that gay men have sex in public parks, and neither am I condoning any kind of infidelity… Just that the only reason KARE 11 made such a big stink about these arrests, and outed these men was senationalism.

“And that they continue to live double lives is ridiculous.  I know PLENTY of gay men who are out and proud and wonderful, and to whine about it being too “difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota” is disingenuous.”

That’s great! Good for them. Is it as easy for a gay person to be a straight person in Minnesota? Have a couple of your gay friends walk into the Burnsville Walmart holding hands and see what reaction they get. Or they could go to the LGBT picnic in Pine City this weekend that is being protested by straight residents and fight just to have a picnic.

what fight? Andy,

Can you tell us more about this “fight” to have a picnic in Pine City?  I haven’t read anything that suggests that anyone is trying to stop the BGLT picnic.  Do you have any specific information or did you just use the word “fight” to sensationalize your comment?

Ok, poor word choice You got me, Master of None. That was poor word choice.

Are you arguing that with my comment because you feel LGBT people don’t have any major concerns? That’s what my point is.

I point out that they can’t have a picnic in the park without a group of people several yards away telling them that they are evil, “incorrect” and corrupting the town’s youth.

If Christians held an event in the park and atheists and secularists set up a picnic next to them criticizing their beliefs, conservatives throughout the state would be up in arms.

My point is, that if LGBT people still had it easy, they could have a picnic in Pine City without religious zealots setting up shop next door.

Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad. But not worse than drunk driving, domestic assault, or a whole host of other crimes. That this became a sensational story at all is the point.

dueling picnics Maybe the fact that you barely condone the Black Dog Park picnic is why some “religious zealots” are offering an alternative to the Pine City picnic.

The GBLT community should really distance itself from the kind of behaviour that occured in Burnsville, condemn it as reckless, irresponsible, dangerous and deviant behaviour.  Rather than just trying to ignore it, or wishing that the news of it were supressed.

“Make it less difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota, and you won’t have to worry about closeted men in the bushes.”

Saying that if only there was gay marriage, then these men wouldn’t be butt fucking in the bushes is a bit of a stretch.  Another poor choice of words perhaps?

Lots of stretching “The GBLT community should really distance itself from the kind of behaviour that occured in Burnsville”

Why? Does the ‘straight community’ distance itself each time there is a prostitution ring bust? Should other communities be actively distancing themselves from extreme minorities within?

Absolutely not. Plus we don’t have like a head drag queen or biker dyke to get on the nightly news and say “These guys are totally bad news.”

Also, are you asserting that gay marriage is the only issue facing the LGBT community? That’s a ‘bit of a stretch.’

And why do you assume that butt***ing was going on in the bushes? I didn’t read that anywhere. Is there something you know about the bushes at Black Dog that neither I nor the news were privy to? Do you just have anal sex on the mind? Or maybe that’s a ‘bit of a stretch’ too.

I’m not doing the stretching And why do you assume that butt***ing was going on in the bushes?

Video from Kare11 showed used condoms on the ground.  Did I incorrectly assume what they were used for?  Ballon animals perhaps? 

Should other communities be actively distancing themselves from extreme minorities within?

Yes, the Left calls for that all the time.

Plus we don’t have like a head drag queen or biker dyke to get on the nightly news and say “These guys are totally bad news.”

No, but you’ve got you, and Minnesota Monitor.  But what comes out of here is “move along, nothing to see here” or better yet “Make it less difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota, and you won’t have to worry about closeted men in the bushes.”

The Scarlet Newscast While I do have qualms about the tone of the newscast and the article, and do think there’s a need for consistency on crime coverage, I’d agree with many of Angela’s points.
I’d also like to add some of my own about the whole solicitation issue. I certainly don’t call myself a victim. Just label me annoyed.
I worked for several years as editor of neighborhood newspapers in Frogtown and the North End of St. Paul. The unfortunate reality in those neighborhoods and other Twin Cities neighborhoods is that girls and women, minding their own business, get solicited for prostitution, mainly by men. Waiting for the bus, walking down the street to an appointment, talking to women friends on the sidewalk, delivering bundles of neighborhood newspapers. . . it happened every other month. And it got damned tiresome.
I’m a middle-aged, gray-haired woman, for God’s sakes. I don’t walk around drawing attention to myself. I don’t show a lot of flesh. . . but it still happened.
If you want to get a bunch of women from those neighborhoods to go on a rant, just ask about being solicited for sex. That’s why residents pushed to get the johns’ pictures put on the Internet. That why there was and still may be a johns’ school, run by the cops.
I quit describing this annoyance to people because the first question I’d get from out-of-area friends was “What were you wearing?” Well, you have to forget the movie Pretty Woman here. I usually was wearing what I always wear — jeans, a t-shirt or sweater, etc. I wore an old Army jacket or an old sweatshirt from my Iowa State days when delivering newspapers because of the ink.
Yet I’d get hit on. The winter I had pneumonia was especially bad. (Is there some john fetish about hacking, coughing women?) It finally got to the point where I’d throw a newspaper business card in the vehicle and ask if the john wanted to be quoted in our next issue. You’ve never seen people drive away so quickly.
I live in Merriam Park, near what used to be a stretch of riverfront where you couldn’t walk your dog or take the kids for a stroll without surprising men having sex or looking for sex.
I knew men who got hit on there. One got hit on while he was with his kids. A park is being developed there so now the activity has moved to Crosby Park. When there’s a crackdown at Crosby, the guys go elsewhere.
C’mon guys, use the Internet to find a good time. Please don’t hang out at the parks.
Yes, sex sells and it makes for scandalous newscasts and articles. yes, you can make all kinds of valid criticism about the coverage of the issue (and I would not go to someone’s house for an interview — that seemed gratuitous) But the other reality is that a lot of us just don’t want to deal with public sex or solicitation in our daily lives.

Nuh uh Master of None: I disagree on two points.

That I, or by extension Minnesota Monitor, are responsible for speaking on behalf of an entire community. I don’t and we don’t.

That condoms are used only for anal sex. Or that wrappers indicate condom usage for anal sex. Any sexual health course or presentation will give you a plenty of ways to use condoms. But that neither here nor there. I’m simply pointing out that your assumption that everything homo has to do with butt****ing. It doesn’t.

Also,

When I wrote this criticism, I contacted local gay groups…unfortunately this piece came out on the weekend. No one was available for comment. They are the ones who have the authority to comment. If they do, I will certainly post it here as a comment, update, or in a new post.

This piece, at its heart, is a criticism on KARE 11′s handling of the arrests. Not a commentary on public indecency. If you want to debate opinions of homosexuality, there’s another post available for that. ANd tons of forums and blogs that specifically cover that issue.

Finally, why do you continue to ignore by comments: “Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad.”

Jane: Thanks for your comment, and we agree for the most part. The sensationalism of this story was over the top. Master of None seems to think my criticism of the media coverage condones the behavior that led to those arrests. I can assure you that I don’t. The arrests were justified, but as KARE 11 said, it’s a problem, and we need to find solutions. I simply offered that perhaps middle aged and elderly men might find an easier time finding a sexual outlet that is not in a park, if homosexuality wasn’t stigmatized to such a degree (like, why are they closeted in the first place? Maybe because 30 years ago police raided gay bars and arrested folks for being gay, and you could be fired), and that solutions other than arrest and media shaming are better means of prevention.

My two cents As a young gay man, I wholeheartedly condemn the actions of these men and any other person who engages in public sex such as this. 

Andy, you are correct to point out the double standard that exists for gay v straight actions; however, that doesn’t mean we should condone these acts.  The reality of the situation is that the double standard exists and we’re not going to be very successful in changing that double standard unless we feverently speak out against people who get caught doing things such as this.  (I seem to remember a rather vocal out cry when Colemans dad was getting a blow job from a prostitute at the pizza joint.) 

The only way we can change the image of gay men as being sex obsessed and willing to do it with anyone, anywhere, is by calling these people out for being what they are, criminals.  It’s no different than expecting people of a partiular religous tradition to speak out agains violence perpetrated by members of their religion.  Or no different than expecting people who support the DFL to call them out for using us as pocketbooks but then backing down from their campaign claims. 

Although You must admit that violence perpetrated in the name of religion is far more dangerous to individuaals and society than sex in the bushes.

And I want to reiterate, once again, that I do not condone sex in the bushes. But if we want to eliminate the problem, we need to look at the root causes. The police themselves said that arrests alone are not enough.

And it’s not the place of the media to use shame. They over stepped in this case.

question why do you continue to ignore by comments: “Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad.”

Because I can’t tell what you are condemning. 

If these same men did whatever it is that they did, in a private home, would  you still condemn this behaviour?  Is it just the fact that they did it in public?  Can’t you see that this behavior goes far beyond a homo/hetrosexual issue, and into basic morality? 

No one was available for comment.  

Did you try both  the head drag queen and the biker dyke?

test test

Just in public My comment is self explanatory. Indecent exposure is exposure of genitals or breasts in a public place. That is the crime at issue, and I have already said that I do not condone indecent exposure. If someone’s genitals are exposed in private, then it’s not indecent exposure, and I have no problem with it.

It’s not terribly confusing.

Unfortunately, it does have to do with sexuality. Which I have already explained, at length, in both the post and in comments. And my whole point (!) is that it is not the media’s job to decide what or who is immoral. They can interview guests and experts to establish community standards, but using shame at the request of law enforcement is inappropriate.

I already told you that there is no head drag queen or biker dyke. You are again ignoring my comments.

if its not illegal, its ok? If someone’s genitals are exposed in private, then it’s not indecent exposure, and I have no problem with it.

If a group of men, got together in a private house, and did what they were doing in that park,  you would have no problem with that at all?

No concern about their spouses, their families?  No moral problem at all? 

That’s just amazing. 

You didn’t mention anything about infidelity Your comment asked a vague question concerning ‘morality’ that I assumed was your typical slam against homosexuality.

If you are asking whether I think it is OK to lie to a spouse. No, that’s not OK. If you are asking me if I condone infidelity, than the answer is no.

morality Can’t you see that this behavior goes far beyond a homo/hetrosexual issue, and into basic morality?

I thought that this question of mine made it clear I wasn’t talking about homosexuality. 

Clear? Either way, I answered your comment. In the future, if you want a direct answer, ask a direct question.

Check Note to Self:  In the future, only ask Andy simple questions.

I respectfully disagree Full disclosure:  I’m straight, but have served on the board of directors for PFLAG, and am about as pro-gay as a straight person can get.  I want gay-friendly education curriculum, legalized gay marriage, the whole shebang.  So my response is that of someone who is an ally of the gay community, not some asshat who hates gays.

But this could be seen as a public health concern, for one thing.  I believe that the majority of men who meet clandestinely for gay sex are likely living “straight” lives–they are likely married or otherwise in heterosexual relationships.  This means they’re likely risking the health (and lives) of their partners. 

If there were similar activity for straights — men and women hooking up at a local park for anonymous sex — I wouldn’t have a problem with THAT getting busted up, either.  If you’re dumb enough to try to fool around on the side in a public way (instead of the good old-fashioned way of renting a cheap hotel room or something similarly cliche), then you deserve for your partner to find out what is going on.

Plus, one could see these busts as a good (albeit embarrassing) thing:  Aren’t they likely to force some guys out of the closet?  Not that it’s doing them a favor, but… geez, it’s 2007 in one of the most gay-friendly places on the planet (relatively speaking). 

Should their faces be on the news?  No more so than anyone else who’s merely been charged and not convicted.  But the local police departments already post pictures, addresses, etc., of men busted for using prostitutes, prior to conviction, so how is this any different?  Personally, I’d like that whole aspect to stop, and for us to get back to “innocent until proven guilty.”  Certainly no man should lose his job simply for getting busted for getting on his knees in a local park, but his wife absolutely deserves to know what is going on, and if it takes law enforcement’s slightly-over-the-top approach, I’m fine with that.

And I’m all for making domestic abuse, drunk driving convictions much more public (I personally have one DUI conviction myself), so it’s not like I’m taking this stance simply on the sex angle.  Personally, I don’t think shame is always a bad thing.  It *can* be a good motivator for change.

Sure, public officials are completely exaggerating when they say local (neighborhood) safety issues are a concern (just gives them an excuse to be so sensationalistic about this acitivity), but that’s no surprise.  That’s police departments for you.

For the men who are gay and just have a fun little fetish for sex in the park with other men, well, I’m sorry they’re getting caught in the crossfire.

In a nutshell, if you don’t want to get publicly shamed (and busted) for having public sex, DON’T DO IT.  Frankly, my main concern is for wives/girlfriends whose health and lives are being risked when their men go trolling for anonymous gay sex, just as my concern is for the wives and girlfriends of men who hook up with hookers in Frogtown.

And that they continue to live double lives is ridiculous.  I know PLENTY of gay men who are out and proud and wonderful, and to whine about it being too “difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota” is disingenuous. 

You Misunderstand I’m not advocating that gay men have sex in public parks, and neither am I condoning any kind of infidelity… Just that the only reason KARE 11 made such a big stink about these arrests, and outed these men was senationalism.

“And that they continue to live double lives is ridiculous.  I know PLENTY of gay men who are out and proud and wonderful, and to whine about it being too “difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota” is disingenuous.”

That’s great! Good for them. Is it as easy for a gay person to be a straight person in Minnesota? Have a couple of your gay friends walk into the Burnsville Walmart holding hands and see what reaction they get. Or they could go to the LGBT picnic in Pine City this weekend that is being protested by straight residents and fight just to have a picnic.

what fight? Andy,

Can you tell us more about this “fight” to have a picnic in Pine City?  I haven’t read anything that suggests that anyone is trying to stop the BGLT picnic.  Do you have any specific information or did you just use the word “fight” to sensationalize your comment?

Ok, poor word choice You got me, Master of None. That was poor word choice.

Are you arguing that with my comment because you feel LGBT people don’t have any major concerns? That’s what my point is.

I point out that they can’t have a picnic in the park without a group of people several yards away telling them that they are evil, “incorrect” and corrupting the town’s youth.

If Christians held an event in the park and atheists and secularists set up a picnic next to them criticizing their beliefs, conservatives throughout the state would be up in arms.

My point is, that if LGBT people still had it easy, they could have a picnic in Pine City without religious zealots setting up shop next door.

Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad. But not worse than drunk driving, domestic assault, or a whole host of other crimes. That this became a sensational story at all is the point.

dueling picnics Maybe the fact that you barely condone the Black Dog Park picnic is why some “religious zealots” are offering an alternative to the Pine City picnic.

The GBLT community should really distance itself from the kind of behaviour that occured in Burnsville, condemn it as reckless, irresponsible, dangerous and deviant behaviour.  Rather than just trying to ignore it, or wishing that the news of it were supressed.

“Make it less difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota, and you won’t have to worry about closeted men in the bushes.”

Saying that if only there was gay marriage, then these men wouldn’t be butt fucking in the bushes is a bit of a stretch.  Another poor choice of words perhaps?

Lots of stretching “The GBLT community should really distance itself from the kind of behaviour that occured in Burnsville”

Why? Does the ‘straight community’ distance itself each time there is a prostitution ring bust? Should other communities be actively distancing themselves from extreme minorities within?

Absolutely not. Plus we don’t have like a head drag queen or biker dyke to get on the nightly news and say “These guys are totally bad news.”

Also, are you asserting that gay marriage is the only issue facing the LGBT community? That’s a ‘bit of a stretch.’

And why do you assume that butt***ing was going on in the bushes? I didn’t read that anywhere. Is there something you know about the bushes at Black Dog that neither I nor the news were privy to? Do you just have anal sex on the mind? Or maybe that’s a ‘bit of a stretch’ too.

I’m not doing the stretching And why do you assume that butt***ing was going on in the bushes?

Video from Kare11 showed used condoms on the ground.  Did I incorrectly assume what they were used for?  Ballon animals perhaps? 

Should other communities be actively distancing themselves from extreme minorities within?

Yes, the Left calls for that all the time.

Plus we don’t have like a head drag queen or biker dyke to get on the nightly news and say “These guys are totally bad news.”

No, but you’ve got you, and Minnesota Monitor.  But what comes out of here is “move along, nothing to see here” or better yet “Make it less difficult to be a gay person in Minnesota, and you won’t have to worry about closeted men in the bushes.”

The Scarlet Newscast While I do have qualms about the tone of the newscast and the article, and do think there’s a need for consistency on crime coverage, I’d agree with many of Angela’s points.

I’d also like to add some of my own about the whole solicitation issue. I certainly don’t call myself a victim. Just label me annoyed.

I worked for several years as editor of neighborhood newspapers in Frogtown and the North End of St. Paul. The unfortunate reality in those neighborhoods and other Twin Cities neighborhoods is that girls and women, minding their own business, get solicited for prostitution, mainly by men. Waiting for the bus, walking down the street to an appointment, talking to women friends on the sidewalk, delivering bundles of neighborhood newspapers. . . it happened every other month. And it got damned tiresome.

I’m a middle-aged, gray-haired woman, for God’s sakes. I don’t walk around drawing attention to myself. I don’t show a lot of flesh. . . but it still happened.

If you want to get a bunch of women from those neighborhoods to go on a rant, just ask about being solicited for sex. That’s why residents pushed to get the johns’ pictures put on the Internet. That why there was and still may be a johns’ school, run by the cops.

I quit describing this annoyance to people because the first question I’d get from out-of-area friends was “What were you wearing?” Well, you have to forget the movie Pretty Woman here. I usually was wearing what I always wear — jeans, a t-shirt or sweater, etc. I wore an old Army jacket or an old sweatshirt from my Iowa State days when delivering newspapers because of the ink.

Yet I’d get hit on. The winter I had pneumonia was especially bad. (Is there some john fetish about hacking, coughing women?) It finally got to the point where I’d throw a newspaper business card in the vehicle and ask if the john wanted to be quoted in our next issue. You’ve never seen people drive away so quickly.

I live in Merriam Park, near what used to be a stretch of riverfront where you couldn’t walk your dog or take the kids for a stroll without surprising men having sex or looking for sex.

I knew men who got hit on there. One got hit on while he was with his kids. A park is being developed there so now the activity has moved to Crosby Park. When there’s a crackdown at Crosby, the guys go elsewhere.

C’mon guys, use the Internet to find a good time. Please don’t hang out at the parks.

Yes, sex sells and it makes for scandalous newscasts and articles. yes, you can make all kinds of valid criticism about the coverage of the issue (and I would not go to someone’s house for an interview — that seemed gratuitous) But the other reality is that a lot of us just don’t want to deal with public sex or solicitation in our daily lives.

Nuh uh Master of None: I disagree on two points.

That I, or by extension Minnesota Monitor, are responsible for speaking on behalf of an entire community. I don’t and we don’t.

That condoms are used only for anal sex. Or that wrappers indicate condom usage for anal sex. Any sexual health course or presentation will give you a plenty of ways to use condoms. But that neither here nor there. I’m simply pointing out that your assumption that everything homo has to do with butt****ing. It doesn’t.

Also,

When I wrote this criticism, I contacted local gay groups…unfortunately this piece came out on the weekend. No one was available for comment. They are the ones who have the authority to comment. If they do, I will certainly post it here as a comment, update, or in a new post.

This piece, at its heart, is a criticism on KARE 11′s handling of the arrests. Not a commentary on public indecency. If you want to debate opinions of homosexuality, there’s another post available for that. ANd tons of forums and blogs that specifically cover that issue.

Finally, why do you continue to ignore by comments: “Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad.”

Jane: Thanks for your comment, and we agree for the most part. The sensationalism of this story was over the top. Master of None seems to think my criticism of the media coverage condones the behavior that led to those arrests. I can assure you that I don’t. The arrests were justified, but as KARE 11 said, it’s a problem, and we need to find solutions. I simply offered that perhaps middle aged and elderly men might find an easier time finding a sexual outlet that is not in a park, if homosexuality wasn’t stigmatized to such a degree (like, why are they closeted in the first place? Maybe because 30 years ago police raided gay bars and arrested folks for being gay, and you could be fired), and that solutions other than arrest and media shaming are better means of prevention.

My two cents As a young gay man, I wholeheartedly condemn the actions of these men and any other person who engages in public sex such as this. 

Andy, you are correct to point out the double standard that exists for gay v straight actions; however, that doesn’t mean we should condone these acts.  The reality of the situation is that the double standard exists and we’re not going to be very successful in changing that double standard unless we feverently speak out against people who get caught doing things such as this.  (I seem to remember a rather vocal out cry when Colemans dad was getting a blow job from a prostitute at the pizza joint.) 

The only way we can change the image of gay men as being sex obsessed and willing to do it with anyone, anywhere, is by calling these people out for being what they are, criminals.  It’s no different than expecting people of a partiular religous tradition to speak out agains violence perpetrated by members of their religion.  Or no different than expecting people who support the DFL to call them out for using us as pocketbooks but then backing down from their campaign claims. 

Although You must admit that violence perpetrated in the name of religion is far more dangerous to individuaals and society than sex in the bushes.

And I want to reiterate, once again, that I do not condone sex in the bushes. But if we want to eliminate the problem, we need to look at the root causes. The police themselves said that arrests alone are not enough.

And it’s not the place of the media to use shame. They over stepped in this case.

test test

question why do you continue to ignore by comments: “Men engaging in indecent exposure in plain view is bad.”

Because I can’t tell what you are condemning. 

If these same men did whatever it is that they did, in a private home, would  you still condemn this behaviour?  Is it just the fact that they did it in public?  Can’t you see that this behavior goes far beyond a homo/hetrosexual issue, and into basic morality? 

No one was available for comment.  

Did you try both  the head drag queen and the biker dyke?

Just in public My comment is self explanatory. Indecent exposure is exposure of genitals or breasts in a public place. That is the crime at issue, and I have already said that I do not condone indecent exposure. If someone’s genitals are exposed in private, then it’s not indecent exposure, and I have no problem with it.

It’s not terribly confusing.

Unfortunately, it does have to do with sexuality. Which I have already explained, at length, in both the post and in comments. And my whole point (!) is that it is not the media’s job to decide what or who is immoral. They can interview guests and experts to establish community standards, but using shame at the request of law enforcement is inappropriate.

I already told you that there is no head drag queen or biker dyke. You are again ignoring my comments.

if its not illegal, its ok? If someone’s genitals are exposed in private, then it’s not indecent exposure, and I have no problem with it.

If a group of men, got together in a private house, and did what they were doing in that park,  you would have no problem with that at all?

No concern about their spouses, their families?  No moral problem at all? 

That’s just amazing. 

You didn’t mention anything about infidelity Your comment asked a vague question concerning ‘morality’ that I assumed was your typical slam against homosexuality.

If you are asking whether I think it is OK to lie to a spouse. No, that’s not OK. If you are asking me if I condone infidelity, than the answer is no.

morality Can’t you see that this behavior goes far beyond a homo/hetrosexual issue, and into basic morality?

I thought that this question of mine made it clear I wasn’t talking about homosexuality. 

Clear? Either way, I answered your comment. In the future, if you want a direct answer, ask a direct question.

Check Note to Self:  In the future, only ask Andy simple questions.