Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gay cruisers warned after boy, 15, is propositioned

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I was informed by an angry lesbian friend our local CIOS diversity police officer in Cornwall thought it totally appropriate to advertise a job for an LGBT youth worker on a website promoting toilet links, glory holes, dogging, cruising & cottaging.
    http://boards.gaybod.com/discus/messages/48464/48536.html

  2. This goes back to our repeated discussions regarding sex in public. While all groups do have individuals who partake in such activities, our community is the only one characterized by such involvement.

    Actively propositioning people in restrooms, dark spaces, etc. is not only unwise but also unsafe. In this case it was a child, in another instance it could be a homophobe with friends and/or weapons.

    I recognize that there is significant difficulty in some circumstances for us to meet people with whom we can have sex, but that does not validate the public sex option. This type of public display of sexuality denigrates all other forms and perpetuates the myth that gay men cannot simply hold hands or kiss in public; the displays of affections must always degenerate to full blown sex.

    My suggestion – police should patrol and arrest anyone involved in public sex. Before propositioning someone who appears young, ask for their age. If they agree to have anonymous sex (or not) with you, take them to your/their house or a motel/hotel/van/friend’s house/wherever.

    And for those of you who say “Gosh, you don’t understand rural difficulties.” or “You are being close minded to those who appreciate this fetish.”, I respond: “Too bad. Learn to live with the appropriate limits that society designates.”

  3. Agree 100% with Jonathan – I don’t think it is acceptable for people to meet in public toilets for sex, gay or not.

  4. @Anon – What’s the problem? It seems as though you’re implying that someone who frequents that website would be inappropriate for the job. Why would that be? Although some might object to their sexual practices, they have nothing to do with their ability to be an excellent youth worker. Don’t forget that many people will think it wrong that Social Work and Teaching jobs are advertised on PinkNews, but we know better: that being gay, or engaging in any particular sex act with other consenting adults, has nothing to do with the ability to these jobs.

  5. I dont have an issue with anyone who wants sex in a public area but BE respectable of other users -Im not sure why people get upset because of a site for gay meets in public there are plenty of sites for straights who want dogging sessions or meets

    gav

  6. Sorry anybody who makes holes in toilet cubical walls to spy on other users are just criminals. Having read some of the thing described on website Anon posted a link for. This is not just consenting adults engaging in a fetish some of it is criminal.

    I cant help but think those who lurk in toilets are more likely to be married living a straight life while engaging in this activity.

  7. theotherone 23 Feb 2010, 9:21pm

    lets scream about Cruising again. Let’s shout down other Queer people for not being like us.

    Yawn. Not again. I’ll just go get my jacket before the kristallnacht

  8. i dont see the problem if somone wants sex in a toilet or in a park. i mean its okay when ‘straight’ people want to join ‘the mile high club’, its even considered glamorous. its okay when ‘straight’ people hold hands walking through the park kissing (when we would get spat at for doing the same thing) this story is just more homophobia, and the people above who think its disgusting are just bowing to the repressed norms of a sad homophobic society.
    maybe if gay people were considered equal to straight people we wouldnt do things that were outisde their norm.
    Answer to this problem and all the others on here – we need a country we can call our own, where we make the laws and where when straight people come to our place – they do as we say.

  9. Some good and interesting points above but also, from one or two people, strains of the purity, cleanliness, and sterility of religion.

    Certainly ask anyone who looks under the age of consent for their age, and be prepared to request proof! (Remember, the child could be working on behalf of some local homophobe, do-gooder, religious person, or even the police. It happens.)

    But do we believe that this 15-year-old boy was BADLY approached? Might he perhaps have just been given a wink or a smile? Or do we believe that he was even approached at all? Might not his father be some homophobe who has made up a story in order to take action against the website? Homophobes can be very sly and inventive.

  10. theotherone 23 Feb 2010, 9:36pm

    nice to see a few mildly sensible people on here not showing a disgusting internalised homophobia.

    Keep it up (so to speak.)

  11. I know of a cottage where during the day it is a cruise for Gay men. At night, the whole area becomes a dogging spot for straight couples, from what I understand, the Police are never there at night, well, not in uniform anyway. Yes, it’s unfortunate that a fifteen year old was apparently propositioned. Going by kids these days, a fifteen year old can look anything but fifteen so it may have been an honest mistake. Paedophilia? I don’t think so. There’s no proof that it was anything but an honest mistake. This sounds a bit more like political hay making than anything else.

  12. Only “mildly sensible”, theotherone? :-)

    “Yes, Eddy, only mildly sensible!”

  13. OFFS – “absolutely disgusting” because someone one year below the age of consent was asked if he’s a member of a website?! Do people really have nothing better to get upset about?

  14. James: “i dont see the problem if someone wants sex in a toilet or in a park. i mean its okay when ‘straight’ people want to join ‘the mile high club'”

    Pray tell me who deems this “OK”? Irrespective of sex or gender, Public sex is antisocial and potentially dangerous, and its about time these closet queens got out of their f_cking ’50s attitudes hanging around staring at each others dicks in public toilets and go to a bar or online like every other decent person.

    It’s perverts like you that give other gay people such a bad rap.

  15. BrazilBoysBlog 24 Feb 2010, 3:59am

    And what was this 15 year old doing in this cottage anyway? I suppose he´s claiming he was simply ´using the toilet´?

    How terribly 80´s :-)

  16. BrazilBoysBlog 24 Feb 2010, 4:09am

    Seriously, gays cruise the world over… even here in Brazil there are numerous gay cruising areas up and down the beach. Locals use them to meet others for sex (going off into the bushes for the more intimate parts), but gays also use these cruising areas as general meeting places..

    So, it happens everywhere, get over it people.

  17. I smell a local rag creating a story out of not very much. Outdoor and public loo sex has a nuisance value where there are a lot of other people and children especially. But rumpy-pumpy, gay or straight, in dense woods and remote rural areas is not a big deal. It’s mostly a question of tact and discretion.

  18. I thought the most interesting thing was the way the councillor in question automatically linked homosexuality and paedophilia in her remarks, an unwarranted and really offensive bit of gay bashing. I’ve commented in the past that stories on this site don’t always give all the facts required to form a reasonable opinion, but in this case, I have to say that asking a teenager if he’s a member of a particular website seems a long way from ‘propositioning’.

    The fact is, all kinds of people meet for or solicit sex in all kinds of places. From young mixed sex couples going for a quick grope behind the bike sheds, graduating to a quick grimy bonk in a bus shelter after leaving a night club, through to gay men hanging round certain woods or other ‘facilities’. But I’d always assumed gay men went where they were less likely to be disturbed by ‘random straights’ wandering in, because of the fear of attack and because such arrivals would surely interrupt any sex taking place ?

    Maybe I’ve missed the point, but surely anywhere frequiented by families would be a dead loss for gay cruisers, unless they have a slightly odd ‘married dad’ fixation ?

  19. I suspect a lot of these people are ‘closet’ cases. While I do support the ‘so long as it’s consented and harms no-one else’ sadly a few will spoil it and give the rest of us a bad name.

    Regardless of that however, dogging or cruising, should be treated the same not one law for one…

  20. Hands up all those, gay or straight that have had sex in public, from heavy petting to full sex. 95% of the uk raises its hand.

  21. Dave: “Hands up all those, gay or straight that have had sex in public, from heavy petting to full sex. 95% of the uk raises its hand.”

    Yes, that may be true, myself included, but a) just because everyone does it doesn’t make it right, moral or legal, and b) the majority of us don’t make a habitual point of it by doing it most weekends or more.

    All I can say is people know it’s illegal, so don’t going whinging or screaming “homophobia” when you get nicked.

  22. I support men cruising in quiet spots to meet others but I don’t support cottaging because it IS a nuisance and can be intimidating in my opinion. In the distant past I twice had unpleasant experiences when I nipped into a public toilet for a pee. In one case I was ‘assaulted’ (eg. touched up) by a man I hadn’t even noticed.

    But let’s get things into perspective. In everything there is always a minority who cross the boundary where ever it is drawn. Similar things happen on a daily basis in clubs, at office parties etc. and that doesn’t mean we need the police to over react and stamp out all of those.

    But, the thing is, this is much worse because it is ‘absolutely disgusting’ gays.

    On the face of it no it isn’t a nice thing to happen. However, if you’ve been around a long time you recognise that the same old stuff always comes up in these news stories. Note how the Councillor mentions ‘young families’. I’m starting to wonder whether some of these incidents are being dreamt up by evangelical christians. Wouldn’t it be interesting to find out more about the father and whether he happens to be a religious gentleman?

    There are other things that worry me about this story. The implication is that the police would try to close down the website if it was hosted in the UK. On what grounds would they do that?

    I wonder how many 15 year old girls get ‘propositioned’ by older men day in day out, either deliberately or by mistake, because they look older? I’m sure it’s widespread and the vast majority of men would back off very quickly when they discovered the girl’s age. And of course that is ‘normal': a straight man seeing a girl he fancies and speaking to her.

    Asking someone if they know a certain website is very subtle. Presumably the 15-year-old didn’t know it, said that, and then looked it up when he got home?

    Make no mistake, the people mentioned in this story would very likely also object to two men holding hands in public.

  23. robn , I actually dont agree with cottaging , but cruising I dont mind. By your admission you have had sex in public, even if it is only once you have no right to judge others that do it once or more. Esp if the person doing it has reasons that have not even been considered on here. I suffer form a crippling disabilty and have trouble getting around. My only point of contact is my local crusing area with other gay men. They are closing down here hard and fast and the isolation is unbareable.I have tried web sites just for friendship, a complete waste of time. I have giving up my council house tenancy, I have all my finances in places and I have written a will. And when the loneliness gets to such a point the I cannot take the hurt no more. I will endeavour to end the pain. You see you all judge and yet you never look at the whole picture. Sadly I am not alone like this, I have spoken to a few others, over the years, just like me. I have lost touch with them , as the crusing ground was the only point of contact.They had reasons not to give a real name or a contact number, being hurt, losing a job, losing loved ones etc etc. See for some us life throws us a bad egg, and we have to deal with it best we can. We do not fit in to the ideal well paid, good looking , well gay man that is so disired. Some of us have imperfections, that are no fault of our own, but we are judged by them daily. So hopefuly to all you anti’s, you might never need the use of a cruising area, but if you do remember this, it is not full of Straight men finding sex, it is not full of gay men finding sex. Most of the time is it a group of very lonely people people fore filling a need that society with it homphobia and discrimantion heaps upon us is deniged them in , what is considered the right sort of meeting place..

  24. In the UK sex in a public place is not illegal provided of course there is a good level of discretion. Sex in public toilets is illegal. But this story, as so many before it draw on suppostion and inappropriate links to paedophillia.

  25. Freddie you make some very valid points and it is something others should be aware of. I think sometimes gay men ask for equal rights and to stop being persecuted, but freely discriminate against others who are different. I hope that things do not get to the point where you feel it is not worth living anymore freddie.Stay strong and keep battling.

  26. BrazilBoysBlog 24 Feb 2010, 2:26pm

    I agree with the points that Freddie makes. Apart from those who seek discreet meetings, (married/closeted etc), these cruising areas are often a haven from the overly judgmental gay scene (with it´s fixation on youth and the ´body beautiful´)

    And, I cannot imagine most peoples idea of someone who cruises to meet others…

    The whole idea of it is to meet someone you like, then go somewhere more discreet and isolated in order to have sex. Do you think that 99%of cruisers WANT to be seen? (by straights or anyone else?)

    The idea of gay men, openly fuc-ing in public parks, out in the open, for anyone and everyone to see is simply ridiculous.

    I also agree about the British police overstepping the mark regarding the website.. Does this mean then that they WOULD have sought to close it down if it had been hosted in the UK? under what grounds exactly? There are many many ´public sex and cruising´ type of websites, along with dogging ones. I would suggest that the police should concentrate their ´overworked´ efforts elsewhere. Aren´t there enough genuine pedo sites for them to be looking into? Without them looking at trying to close sites involving activities for consenting adults?

  27. Pumpkin Pie 24 Feb 2010, 3:27pm

    My opinion on public sex is pretty neutral (except when it involves toilets – eeewwwwwww!). I’m not into it at all and would never do it, because of the immense lack of privacy. I wouldn’t bach those who are into it, though. Except for people who leave used condoms lying around. Seriously, what kind of disgusting person would do that? Probably the same sort of subhumans as those who don’t pick up after their dogs. Right, so I have no problem with considerate people doing it.

    Anyway, I just came here to point out the hilarity of the accusations. As Rehan pointed out, a guy who was nearly legal (point being that he might have looked like he was) was asked if he was a member of a sex site. My god! The horror! Give me a break. And what a polite way to proposition someone, too. This sort of thing happens to underage straight club-goers all over the country (and far less “politely”), but I never hear anything about councillors wanting to shut them down. You could end up propostioning a child by asking somebody out in a bar, for goodness sake.

    Oh, and that bit about the police not being able to shut down the site made me laugh. Suck it, piggies. Internet 1, tin-pot fascists 0.

  28. Pumpkin Pie 24 Feb 2010, 3:30pm

    ^
    Oops. When I wrote “I wouldn’t bach those who are into it”, that should have read “wouldn’t bash“. Typos happen, but I felt I should correct that one because it sounded like gibberish. :p

  29. Rob_N I do wonder about you…. in post 14 you say of cruisers,
    “It’s perverts like you that give other gay people such a bad rap” and suggest that every decent (gay) person meets their partners in bars or online. Apart from the fact this is just unreal, in that gays (like every other variety of person) meet partners in all sorts of places, it’s odd that in post 21 you then admit that you’ve engaged in sexual conduct in public!

    So what does it all mean ? That you see yourself as a pervert ? Or you’re not a perv but everyone else who does it is ? or you’re ok ‘coz you only do it now and then ? Are you projecting some unhappiness about your own life and behaviour onto other people ?

  30. theotherone 24 Feb 2010, 5:56pm

    ‘Suck it, piggies. Internet 1, tin-pot fascists 0.’

    you have such a way with words pie :-D

  31. Incidentally, I think it may be worth publicising the fact that this isn’t the first incidence recently of hysteria being whipped up against supposed gay cruising in Bournemouth, in fact I do wonder if it’s all a fake, a private homophobic crusade by some nutter.

    For example, back in January, an area called “Rhododendron Mile” was hacked to the ground because of the suggestion that gay men might be cruising there (go to http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/4881940.Rhododendron_Mile_bushes_chopped_down_to_curb__gay_cruising_/ if you want to see scorched earth policies in action); presumably having vandalised an area gay men might go to which wasn’t frequented by families, the next step was to start shrieking about an area apparently used by families because gay men might be cruising there.

    It all just looks too fake, too manufactured, too much someone’s private obsession with demonising gay men. Note how some dumb cop says the area is now “safe” – like gay men were a danger to the public. This isn’t about public dsafety, it’s about making gay men out as a threat to “nice” people.

  32. Freddie, thanks for everything you wrote.

    There are one or two arrogant apes posting here who live in London which is THICK with gay bars and gay clubs of all kinds. They don’t have an inkling of what it is like outside of London and the MAJOR cities.

    And they have proven to the rest of us time and time again that they are totally lacking in the ability to empathise with the situations of others.

    So just ignore what they say.

    As for your own situation. Try hard to move yourself to a more favourable area. It’s sad but for single gay men, flight to the cities is something of a necessity.

  33. well I look at it all like this,IN the cruising areas, if all these gays signed a piece of paper that they would only meet there and never have sex, they would still be unwanted and pursued by the councils and police. Its not the sex that offends the locals it is the fact that they are gay.

  34. Freddie: I was quite moved by your comment, and I DO appreciate that maybe living in a metropolis like London, maybe I am spoilt.
    That said, one has to define what it is you really want, is it contact or friendship, or is it an anonymous sexual liaison?
    I fully understand cruising and cottaging 50 years ago, but the fact you are even commenting on here indicates you have the internet, which allows communication not just down the road, but on the other side of the planet, so to a certain degree, I cannot understand why you feel lonely, and have the need to risk not only your reputation, but your civil liberty as well by hanging around in wooded areas. Surely there must be more civilised alternatives?

  35. DavidW (29): For crying out loud man, read the f_cking article before you spout your judgements. I stated that I could hold my hand up to being guilty of public sex during my lifetime.

    That is an entirely different premise to people that are down Hampstead Heath 4 nights a week shagging like rabbits with whatever dark shadow with an appendage they happen to chance by.

    Get some f_cking perspective.

  36. I cannot understand why you feel lonely

    then perhaps rob you should not comment

  37. Pumpkin Pie 25 Feb 2010, 3:14am

    you have such a way with words pie

    Haha, thanks. I thought that was as eloquent as they deserved. :3

  38. It’s a myth that the internet is a substitute for the kind of friendships and contacts that are made when men stroll around cruising areas. Nor is it ‘outdated’ in this age of 18-30 focused gay bars and Gaydar.

    Cruising is not all about sex in a public place. It is about meeting. Sometimes there is no sexual attraction and just chat, sometimes men go home together, sometimes they have sex outdoors.

    For a start with online there is the time element. You can waste a huge amount of time typing into chat windows and never meet anyone face to face. People may not be who they claim to be.

    For many people life is too short. They are busy. Fakes and timewasters get nowhere cruising. That is why they hang out on Fitlads and Gaydar busily rating people, sending private picture requests and browsing photos all evening.

    If the day ever comes when a gay man can chat up another man anywhere in the way straight men can do it with women then there will be less cruising.

    Until then, if local councils really want to do something about cruising then they should help to create places that welcome our entire community of all ages. Free spaces which don’t revolve around alcohol and being under 30. That might reduce cruising, but won’t eliminate it because there are some who simply don’t want to be part of anything that is LGBT and organised.

  39. @Rob_N: Just for the record, what are the acceptable and proper ways of having sex? You’re obviously an expert and I desperately need enlightening. Just to make sure that I’m not, you know, being a pervert or committing a sin or frightening the horses or anything.

  40. There’s a lot of sense in what Gary says.

  41. Charlie: I’m not going to lower myself to your level and answer your barbed question. You, like so many on here, bleat on about their “human rights” and how LGBT people should be treated like everyone else, yet you continue to do things like this, which tars the rest of us with the same brush. Gay men have enough trouble trying to counteract the stereotypes, yet it goes on year after year. And before some twat pipes up about ‘dogging’ just drop it, that’s only been going on in relatively recent times, gay cruising is WAY older. And if this is all just about making friends in the dark, because there’s nowhere else to go, where do all the lesbians go? Sure as hell they aren’t hanging around in parks groping each other at 4 in the morning.

  42. RobN it’s the way men are programmed. When two men meet it is different. And that is why we shouldn’t be apeing heterosexual marriage.

    We are hunters and like the thrill of stalking our prey in the open air. We like watching sex. Have you ever wondered why the human penis is shaped the way it is? Here’s a clue: it isn’t designed for ‘one-to-one’ sex.

    You aren’t going to change hundreds of thousands of years of evolution in a couple of decades and no matter how much you would like to force everyone into gay saunas, bars, gay chatrooms and civil partnerships just because maybe those suit you.

    Men have been cruising and hooking up forever. But lately the ‘progress’ has started to become a bit of a strait jacket for the many who don’t want to fit into a narrow little pink lifestyle. A spotlight is being shone on areas of our life and culture which often went unnoticed before and – from drag queens and men only spaces to cruising – those things have become a target.

    The thing that really disgusts me are the gay politicians and ‘gay community spokesmen’ who have sold us out so they can curry favour with the police and other powers that be.

    At the GetBent documentary event in Manchester in 2007 we showed a film called ‘The Revolution of Desire’ – all about sexual liberation in France in the 1960’s. The attitude that gay men had in those days was to celebrate the difference and stick two fingers up to society and the authorities. More and more I think we should be doing that instead of trying to fit in and allowing our community to be destroyed in return for nothing.

  43. Gary: So fine, stick two fingers up at society. But when you get your head kicked in by a couple of thugs for queer activity in the undergrowth, don’t expect any support. You can’t have it both ways, you are either part of society or you’re not. If you are not, go paddle your own canoe and drop all this gay rights crap.

    (I am NOT condoning queer bashing here, merely playing devil’s advocate)

  44. RobN I think you’ll find that most violent attacks in Manchester happen in and around Canal Street and the gay village (in fact I have a list of news stories on my website). The BBC also reported a rape in a sauna not long ago. Taking guys home from clubs is more dangerous than cruising. Often drugs and alcohol are involved leading to violence and mistakes over safer sex. People get lulled into a false sense of security in their own surroundings when in fact they are in an enclosed space with a complete stranger. Many of the most famous serial killers met their victims in gay pubs and clubs, not by cruising.

    So in your opinion people can only expect to be free of violence if they buy into the narrow commercial lifestyle that you personally approve of? A bit like Manchester Pride where we have to purchase an expensive ticket to get into a fenced off area, as that is the only way we can be protected from violence as we ‘celebrate’ our ‘equality’.

  45. Gary: The world is by no means perfect, and I take your point. Things have changed rapidly in the last few years, mainly because of the Internet. I know it’s not everyone’s choice, but it has had a profound effect, the once-packed gay bars are empty, (those still around). I just think there has to be other alternatives.

    That is why I made the comment about not feeling lonely, because I have always found many sites good for chatting and making conversation. A lot like the sex too, but that is not everyone’s cup of tea. I just think the Internet opens up opportunities to people that may not normally get out that much. This forum is a typical example.

  46. I totally agree with you on all of that. It is a great resource for people who are isolated for whatever reason.

  47. Tim O'Connor 26 Feb 2010, 12:38pm

    Picture, if you will, a garden of Eden, a Shangri-La. It is full of lush greenery, flowers, birdsong, and babbling brooks. It is tranquil and beautiful and the air is clean and pure. And here comes a beautiful man along one of its paths. And here comes another. They stop and smile and enjoy each other. They desire each other, to enjoy the pleasure of each other’s body. They follow each other off the path to a soft and grassy patch. And there they luxuriate in each other’s bodies, enjoying the pleasures of love. Others may even amble by and join them. They celebrate this place, life, love, sex, and pleasure.

    OK, a leafless wood in cold and miserable Blighty is not quite so idyllic and not every visitor is a beauty, but the above scenario is totally beautiful and pure and natural. It has ever been thus and so it will continue.

    Trouble is, some miserable buggers with puritan or religious fixations on the wrongness of natural sex want to put an end to it.

  48. Picture, if you will, a scrappy old bit of parkland that even the dogs avoid because it smells so bad. It is full of bin liners, fly-tipping and old mattresses, used condoms and wrappers. It is dark and seedy and the air smells of stale sweat and urine. And here comes a dirty old man along one of its paths. And here comes another. They stop and smile and dribble at each other. They desire each other, to enjoy the pleasure of each other’s body. They follow each other off the path to a muddy ditch. And there they grope with each other’s bodies, enjoying the pleasures of filth, squalor and pure sex. Others may even amble by and join them if they don’t throw up first. They celebrate this place, complete anonymous sex with no feeling, emotion or responsibility.

    It has ever been thus and so it will continue.

    Trouble is, some miserable buggers with civilised and moral backbones consider it antisocial when there are plenty of alternatives to do it in private without them and the rest of the general public that might stumble on your bare flabby arse bouncing up and down in the undergrowth.

  49. RobN wrote “Picture, if you will, a scrappy old bit of parkland that even the dogs avoid because it smells so bad. It is full of bin liners, fly-tipping and old mattresses, used condoms and wrappers. It is dark and seedy and the air smells of stale sweat and urine. And here comes a dirty old man along one of its paths. And here comes another. They stop and smile and dribble at each other. They desire each other, to enjoy the pleasure of each other’s body. “They follow each other off the path to a muddy ditch. And there they grope with each other’s bodies, enjoying the pleasures of filth, squalor and pure sex. Others may even amble by and join them if they don’t throw up first. They celebrate this place, complete anonymous sex with no feeling, emotion or responsibility.”

    I don’t think Tim was referring to the kind of area YOU’RE familiar with, RobN. But I’m glad to hear you at least have some kind of park, even if it does sound like a post-nuclear graveyard.

    Many sympathies.

  50. Tim, thanks for your post. A man after my own heart! Hampstead Heath about twilight on a lovely balmy summer’s afternoon: there’s nothing like it. A million million times better than some gay dive down in the city.

  51. RobN

    I agree with some of your concerns regarding public sex, but I do think you somewhat s miss the point with regards the wider picture. . . I think it is called “Hypocrisy”.

    With heterosexual “Dogging” out of control, and with websites promoting a range of public venues across the country were heterosexuals can meet for a range of “Nonshopping based activities”; in Tesco car parks alone in London.

    I would like to add . . . If I visit a supermarket, I only want to buy my sausages from the Butchers counter – Call me old fashioned . . . but I really do not want “Heterosexuality” rammed down my throat in a Tesco Car park.

  52. JohnK: Please note my comment in (41) – “And before some twat pipes up about ‘dogging’ just drop it, that’s only been going on in relatively recent times, gay cruising is WAY older.”

    I am certainly not trying to pick out gay men though,. I think public sex is vile, unnecessary, dangerous and anti-social – irrespective of sexuality. I agree there is a level of hypocrisy in that straights seem to get away with it more than gays, but then, we are the ones trying to get a better public image and dispel the stereotype. People ending up going up before the beak, and all it’s associated publicity really does wipe out all the hard work put in by others to give LGBT people a decent image.

  53. “we are the ones trying to get a better public image and dispel the stereotype. People ending up going up before the beak”

    Pleased to see you seem to count yourself as part of the gay liberation movement, Rob, “trying to get a better public image and dispel the stereotypes” because most of your comments on these pages have given me the impression you want an end to all efforts to remove stereotyping and homophobia!

    As for your bewailing “People ending up going up before the beak”, you should remember that it is not gay men who willing go up “before the beak”, but, rather, it is homophobic members of the public and homophobic policemen who pick on gay men and bloody well send us up “before the beak”.

    Even this article about the case in Bournemouth suggests there’s a possibility of some homophobic parent fixating on a gay cruising ground. Up where i am here in Lancashire we have a cruising ground way out in the countryside, absolutely lovely, but there’s been the odd straight obsessive who has come out here to walk around at night and get offended, in order to try and get the police along. I think you should save your spitting for them not us!

    I think there should be designated areas of natural beauty for people who want to enjoy sex au naturel!

  54. RobN you seem to believe that prior to the 1960’s heterosexual sex only happened within marriage and in bedrooms? In fact people have always had sex outdoors. Everywhere from lovers lanes which have been around for centuries to ‘knee tremblers’ in the back streets of the east end of London.

    I don’t know if you saw the recent BBC4 drama about Doctor Niven and the spanish flu outbreak in 1918? There was a sequence on Armistice Day set in Manchester town hall which included a man and woman having sex in a (public) toilet. You also need to read up about some of the things that went on during the nightly blackouts in World War Two.

    As I said before, when we are able to feel free to approach and chat up any man in public, and hold hands and kiss anywhere, then perhaps cruising will die out somewhat. What is going on at the moment is an attempt to force us into a one-size-fits-all commercial gay ghetto (clubs, saunas, gay dating sites) which many of people don’t want to be part of.

  55. JohnH: If I was a copper and had to wade through miles of wooded terrain to find a secluded spot away from any roads or public, and I found two people having sex, even in broad daylight, I would not be able to arrest them. The reason for that is, it is technically, and legally “private”. A “public” space is one that is frequented by many people, and I am sure even you wouldn’t really want others tripping over your prostrate body in the middle of a footpath.

    I think the point of the argument is not whether it is a matter of having sex outdoors, but whether or not it is actually *private*. You might want to bear that in mind should you ever get arrested.

  56. Rob N, it seems to me that once you have made a stand you just stick to it despite all the points that people put to you which make your stand groundless.

    You fail to consider evidence which doesn’t accord with whatever stand you have made.

    For example, your suggestion that policemen cannot harass people having sex in secluded spots if completely blown out of the water by the hundreds of publicised cases there have been of police doing precisely that! And forget about the daylight! They even do it in the dead black hours of night and early morning. Driving through gay outdoor meeting places with their lights on harassing people who simply cannot be seen unless sought!

    Why are you such a prude?

  57. David Myers 1 Mar 2010, 2:01pm

    Excellent points John H. As for RobN, you certainly have his number down well. A hypocritical prude who’s the “I’m alright Jack” and “I’ve got mine” type (through societally approved forms and places)and who want’s society’s approval so much that he’s willing to condemn his own kind because they don’t do things his way and “besides they upset the straights, so they are messing things up for everyone else” (my projection of the logical extention of his point of view). I’m sure if he lived in the US he would be a log cabin republican. We are not here to beg for the approval of hetrosexual homophobes. Those who hate us will use whatever they can to condemn us. Don’t do the homophobes’ dirty work for them. If you do, you are practicing homophobia (and self hate) whether you’re gay or not.

  58. DAvid Myers I agree. Like you say ROBN just ‘wants society’s approval so much that he’s willing to condemn his own kind because they don’t do things his way and “besides they upset the straights, so they are messing things up for everyone else”’ he’s a troll

  59. Jason: No, I personally don’t have an “own kind” so why I should show affinity to a bunch of dirty old pervs shagging away in the bushes, God only knows.

    You bunch of hypocritical, self-centred tossers want to be able to break the law whenever you want to indulge your carnal excesses, blame the police for wrongful arrest and claim it’s all a free country etc, but as soon as the tables are turned, you scream “homophobia” when your own personal rights are infringed.

    Like I said earlier, you are either part of society, or you’re not. You can’t turn it off and on like a tap when it suits you.

    I stated the legal aspect because two of my best mates are (gay) Detective Sergeants, and they both explained what the law was regarding this. Whether this happens in reality is another matter, but that is for you to fight the next time you are arrested for literally being caught with your trousers down.
    personally, I have no sympathy.
    To coin a phrase: “Get a f_cking room.”

  60. Sorry to see you bringing age into this with your ‘dirty old pervs’ remark and quite wrongly.

  61. Gary: I’m sorry. That was rather ageist of me. Read “Dirty pervs.”

  62. Pumpkin Pie 2 Mar 2010, 6:13pm

    Personally, I think dog **** is a MUCH bigger problem than public sex.

    Times I’ve been confronted with public sex or its aftermath in my entire life: I dunno, two, maybe three times? There was this nasty pair of panties at the foot of the school field, and I could have sworn I saw a condom when I was out walking once. Both kind of icky, but not really a big deal.

    Times I’ve been confronted with dog **** this year alone: I can’t keep count, in the dozens, maybe hundreds. Public footpaths, grassy areas near children’s play areas, the local park, even the outlying areas of the town centre. I’m exceptionally careful, but it seems my shoes fall afoul (har-har) of it at least once a year. It’s disgusting, harmful, and it makes me want to wretch (especially while scrubbing my shoes).

    So why the hell are police bothering with public sex when dog fouling is a far, far, far bigger problem? Sure, maybe the sight of two grown-ups going at it in the bushes might be bad for the eyes of a child, but dog **** can LITERALLY make them go blind. Priorities, please.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all