DUers - do you condone this?

[Delano]

Over the weekend, I was out with the kids in the car, and we found ourselves at the base of Buena Vista Park, a park that is a big forested hill. The kids wanted to go play in the park, so we started hiking up through the brush (not knowing that there was a much easier staircase on the other side.) As we got a ways up, we started to see men sitting around, hidden behind bushes, in odd poses, and in unusually high numbers. Given that is was so overgrown, I got the sense that this was a park used for sex by promiscuous men. I asked one guy I saw if this park was an okay place to take kids and he said no, so I left.

Afterwards, I felt a bit perturbed that we were unable to use a PUBLIC park because of a bunch of men who were too inconsiderate to GET A ROOM. I really don't care what people do in private, but I'd prefer not to explain the messy details of sex to my 4 and 6 year old. Luckily, I don't think they saw anything explicit, but am I being a bigot to be annoyed at this?

I'm thinking of calling the local PD to complain.

[oostevo]

1. Well, I'm not gay, but ...

If it were men and women doing this, I still wouldn't want to explain it to kids, much less have them see it. I think the fact that it was just men is a bit irrellevant.

[Delano]

4. Yes, it would be.

But I've never heard of large numbers of men and women doing that in public parks (though I'm sure it DOES happen)

But yes, it's the lurid behavior, not the sexual orientation that is the problem.

[Delano]

14. By the way, I'm all for...

people of any sexual persuasion having nudist camps or sex clubs or whatever they want to so, so long as it's a place that is clearly demarcated as such so that unwitting parennts won't bring their kids there.

I haven't lived here all that long, and maybe everybody in town already knows this about this park. I was pretty shocked - I've heard of such places before, but never happened across one before.

[MadHound]

47. You may not have heard of large numbers of hetros "doing it" in public

But boy howdy, it happens. I live in Missouri, and down at the Lake of the Ozarks there is a particular cove called "Naked Cove". Nothing but public hetro sex for acres and acres. Same thing is done on beaches all over the country, especially during spring break. Mardi Gras also comes to mind. Frat and sorority parties(at least on some campuses) are nothing but public sex orgies, as is any red light district in this country. Public hetro sex is alive and well, but it is underreported, or not reported at all. After all, it sells papers much better by stirring up peoples' bigotry with lurid stories of gay public sex. This shocks and offends people. On the other hand, most people just snicker when talking about public sex by hetros. Once again, as with many many matters in our day and age, it is not about the reality of life, but the spin the so called liberal media puts on the reality.

[Padraig18]

2. I think it's trashy as hell.

You have every right to be annoyed.

[GirlinContempt]

3. Hmmmm...

See, I don't want any kind of sex in my parks, really....
I'm having problems replying though, just because the tone of your post kinda rubs me the wrong way.

[Misunderestimator]

7. Yes, it's that subterranean homophobia coming out...

rubs me the wrong way too.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. Sounds like a Dylan song. "Subterranean Homophobia Blues".

Got a ring to it.

And the original post isn't really "homophobic". It is a fact that a certain, relatively small, percentage of the gay male community engages in anonymous, promiscuous sexual activity. It is also a fact that, at least in major cities with large gay communities, public parks have traditionally (going back at least half a century or more) been assignation spots for those looking for this sort of encounter, because of the ease of meeting someone and the nearness of relative seclusion...recognition of the fact isn't "homophobic", merely realistic.

It would appear that this park is one of those known assignation spots, although if it were a makeout spot for hetero teenagers the behaviour would be just as wrong.

[Misunderestimator]

22. The original post was edited to be less inflammatory...

Though you're right about the song... I'll do the music if you provide the lyrics. :bounce:

[Delano]

23. Yeah, but after thinking about it...

I realized that my post put the onus on all gays to answer for the actions of a few, and that's obviously unfair. I'm a bit more comfortable with how I rephrased it.

[Misunderestimator]

25. Thanks...

That really is big of you. :toast:

[GirlinContempt]

26. *smirk*

[Delano]

8. Well, I was reluctant to post it...

... And if the mods think the subject matter is inappropriate, they can delete it. I'll take your response as a "Yes, it's uncool what they were doing, and yes this is a bigoted post."

[GirlinContempt]

29. The tone of the post was just...

kinda like 'gays are ok in their place, it doesn't DISGUST me or anything, buuuuut...'
which always annoys me

[Delano]

40. I knew I approached it the wrong way right affter I posted it.

And I only did a halfassed job of defusing it.

Life's a bitch. Sometimes posts go awry.

And it doesn't disgust me even a little. The fact that they would do this where little kids might walk by does disgust me a bit, though.

I'd be mad if straight people were doing this too.

If I had been in the Castro I would have been more on alert for it...

[GirlinContempt]

41. Understood :)

[Liberal Veteran]

5. I don't think this question should be limited to just gay DU'ers.

We are not some kind of monolithic group and inappropriate behavior is not limited to just gay people.

I'm not a big proponent of people having sex in public places period.

[Blue-Jay]

6. <ding ding ding> We have a winner!

Doing "things" in public that are best left in private is not good, regardless of who is doing it. The fact that they may have been gay means nothing.

[MissMillie]

48. Hear Hear!!!!!

homo or hetero..... if you're going to go parking, do it at night and keep in in your car.

[ScreamingMeemie]

56. Good answer. I don't want to see anyone doing this regardless of their

sexual preference.

[Misunderestimator]

9. I don't think that the question really needed to be asked.

Certainly, if you as a private citizen in a public park comes across something that is a crime and you feel you should report it... REPORT IT!!!

What the HELL does this have with being gay... and why are you specifically asking for gay people's opinions?

[Delano]

11. Point taken.

Not going to pursue that aspect of it.

[Delano]

10. I asked if I was being bigoted...

and there were enough yes responses that I went ahead and edited to tone it down.

It may be too little too late. My concern is less a political one than a civic one.

I totally understand why some would be offended at the undertones, and I don't mean to scapegoat ANYONE who wasn't actually there.

I am still pissed at those guys who were there, though...

[Misunderestimator]

12. Ok... benefit of the doubt then.

Thanks for rephrasing.

So, what was the question again... "If someone is walking with their children in a public park and they witness a crime, should they report that crime?" Yeah, paraphrasing, but you know... The answer... "Yes."

:)

[daveskilt]

13. not bigoted

thats out of order - I want to take my kids to a park and don't care if there are the odd couple rolling around but when it becomes a sleazy pickup point they need to get a room.

[Delano]

15. Rolling around is fine.

I wouldn't mind if my kids saw a same-sex couple or a hetero couple kissing.

I can explain the love part. I'm just not ready to get into the sex part yet...

[Misunderestimator]

16. Then we're in violent agreement...

:hi:

[nini]

17. Sad thing is I bet the PD already knows

but I'd complain anyway. Stuff like that has to stay behind closed doors so innocent kids don't run across it.

hell, even as an adult I don't want to run into anyone else doing the nasty anywhere... get a room folks!

[Corkey Mineola]

43. 'Get a room!'

I think it's important to note that not all sexual beings want to get a room... some want to have sex outdoors or other places. What's the big deal with rooms and beds?

[nini]

44. ok, get a 'private' outdoors location..

not a 'public' outdoor location.


'Get A Room' was just the cliche phrase I used

[Book Lover]

19. Buena Vista in San Francisco?

It is "known" as a gay hookup place, so I don't know how far you'd get with the SFPD. On the other hand, there are plenty of places in SF for gay fellas to hook up, so maybe complaining would get some cops in, sweeping the park.

I mostly agree with you, by the way: if public fucking must happen, at least do it after dark.

[fishnfla]

20. We have the same problem down here on the seashore

The Canaveral National Seashore has a nude beach section and it has become a problem, men engaging in sex in plain view. Even the straight naturists dont want to go there anymore.

[tishaLA]

21. Well, we know public spaces have long been bastions of

heterosexual mating. Didn't "Blueberry Hill" canonize it in the American Rock and Roll Songbook? And every public space is indeed a sexual space, from the produce aisle at your supermarket to the back rooms of bars in the Castro.

I have actually appeared in films about public sexuality, and I am interested in the way sexuality works as part of political discourse, so I don't want to get too involved in this matter, but I will say this: the folks who were the intellectual heads of the dearly departed SexPanic! had great article son their website (I just checked; it is no longer operative, but many articles about SexPanic! remain on the web). They offer a very astute historical/sociological perspective on sexuality and the public sphere. And there are also good academic articles about sex and the public sphere (perhaps the best one of which is Critical Inquiry's "Sex In Public" issue from few years ago).

[Delano]

24. Sorry,but I just think it's inconsiderate.

I don't care if people want to go to a secluded area of the woods where it's unlikely for others to run into them and do whatever. The idea of outdoor sex is kinda nice, a way of doing something natural in the middle of nature, but this is a big city and it's a public park. It ain't cool.

[tishaLA]

30. Indeed. One would hope

you never engaged in any public sexual behavior that might have made others uncomfortable. After all, holding hands and kissing--let alone a grab of the ass here or a hand on the thigh there-- may appear innocent to you, but it might also be a slap in the face to people who feel less free to engage in similar behavior with their partners.

And I'd assume you never went "parking" or necking, either. After all, to some people, a public park in a big city is like being in the middle of nature somewhere.

BTW, did you actually SEE any action taking place or was this just a preemptive strike against possible blow jobs?

[markses]

33. You might also check out John Paul Ricco's "The Logic of the Lure"

(University of Chicago press, 2002). It has a chapter on publicness and public sex in queer theory.

[-..__...]

27. "odd poses"?

Now I'm curious... explain.

[Delano]

34. like theyhad heard somebody coming, hastily covered up...

Then posed in faux "nonchalant" positions. The silence was deafening, Usually when you come across people on hiking trails they nod or say hi. These guys kind of slunk behind the nearest bush. It was kind of eerie.

There were DOZENS of them in a fairly small area.

[Duncan Grant]

28. San Francisco GAY man here.

Hi DU!
PM me for the 'down-low' regarding this topic.

Also want to extend an invitation to Delano for coffee or a beer - my treat. After all, we're practically neighbors.

:hi:

[Corkey Mineola]

52. Good Catch

Hey 94114
You are so astute! Keep it up! We must continue to make the world safe for HomoOcracy!
xxoo
PHN

p.s. Meet me in the park about 10 p.m., okay? 3rd bush ... I mean tree, to the right... uh I mean left.

[Duncan Grant]

55. Smart ass! ;^)

Let's cruise at the beach like all the straight people do (with their odd poses and suspicious behavior). Straight cruising at the beach is so infamous that they named a cocktail after it - what it's called again - sex on/at the beach or something like that. :eyes:

ps: and please see post #38 - it clarifies this whole thread. :hi:

edit: post #38

[Deja Q]

31. I am gay and I would be annoyed too. Homo, hetero, anything-o...

Keep it in a room, I agree. I've sadly seen more heteros fondling each other in public parks (let alone public malls), but that's another story.

Do call the PD, I hate to say it. We're not a free country and that is a public place.

[tishaLA]

32. You'll notice he didn't see anything happening

what do you do....call the cops because people are assembles in public in odd poses?

[Delano]

35. We didn't see anything...

Strictly because wew hightailed it outta there as quick as possible.

I'll give the guys some credit for hastily putting on pants and getting in "nonchalant" poseswhen they heard somebody coming. I suppose that was sort of considerate.

But I imagine that if we had gone much further up the hill we would have seen more than we would've wanted to.

[Deja Q]

36. I would be... concerned. Maybe not because they were

doing something I never get to do but because they may have been planning something less than a love-in. Maybe a gang-bang, except the gang would bang somebody on the head and nick their billfold...?

If a group of people are doing something strange, I'd find a corner and call the authorities and say there's potentially suspicious activity but nothing definite.

[Delano]

38. It wasn't that kind of atmosphere (although you never know)

More like a bunch of guys halfway hiding behind bushes while others sat on rocks sunning themselves.

It may be that all I interrupted was cruising and not sex, I dunno, but even I'm not so thick that I couldn't tell more or less what was going on.

[foreigncorrespondent]

37. I find this to be...

...a gay bait thread ONLY!

Why? Simple! Further down you say: But I've never heard of large numbers of men and women doing that in public parks (though I'm sure it DOES happen) Just because you don't hear about large numbers of straight couples doing this doesn't actually mean it doesn't happen, inlarge numbers. It is just more controversial when gay couples do it, so of course you are going to hear about it more. You know? Us queers are just not "normal."

[Delano]

39. Maybe so...

Judging from the "dating shows" on TV these days. straights are pretty damn promiscuous now. Whether people who do this are "normal" or not is irrelevant to me. My only concern is that it is inconsiderate of others who might be passing through that public space.

I don't think for a second that most gays do this. A number of gays have posted disapproving of it...

[Corkey Mineola]

42. It's Tough

I live in SF and I know that some areas of some parks are 'cruisy.' I think it's actually true of most public parks across the country. Repression breeds this kind of covert behavior. Why does it persist in SF therefore, when it's okay to have sex when you want at someone's home or in a public/private space? I think the thrill attracts men. I'm not sure.
But I think that it's good to let gay men have their spots in parks and take the kids to the other parts. That part of BV park is not really kid-friendly anyway. But if you go up the path you'll have a lovely time. And the gay men won't pester you.
Is it possible to co-exist? I think so.
Oh, and on a public health note, whatever you do in the park... use a condom! Or at least teach your kids about them!
PHN.

[Delano]

45. So should I

Put the condom on the swing, the slide or both?

At this age (4 and 6) the only thing I would teach my kids about condoms is not to pick them up when they find them on the ground. :eyes:

[Delano]

46. As far as co-existing...

I half agree. But what can be done to protect people who don't know? I live closer to Golden Gate park and have not noticed this activity there. I'm not as familiar with the area around BV park, but I assume there are a few families with kids.

If my kids had been around 10 or so, and exploring the neighborhood on their own, they might have happened across who knows what kind of scene.

If we "agree to co-exist", what can be done to ensure that kids aren't exposed to it at an appropriate age. None of my SF guide books warned about this sort of thing. They just described BV park as having a lovely view (one I never dot to see BTW). Maybe these guys could tack a sign up to a tree that says "Cruisy Area" or something. Is this just a stupid idea?

[Corkey Mineola]

51. Most men are discreet

I think that, as a straight and concerned parent, you should go about your business and let your kids play in parks. Gay men have manners. We don't take this kind of behavior into the places where kids are found. Covertism is the whole point.
Gay men are not interested in exposing kids to this at all.
They will skedaddle when they see you coming along with your kids.
That's what I think, anyway.
PHN

p.s. Joking about the condoms and the kids. OF course some are too young to teach. But pre-condom age (which I think should begin at age 10 or so for boys...) should include how germs are spread and ways, including barriers (gloves, etc.) we use to avoid catching them. It sets up the logic for later...
Teaching self-esteem of course is key too.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

60. Your kid is 100 times more likely to be molested by a straight male

FBI crime statistics bear me out on that fact.

Would you frantically post in fear if you happened across a straight man that you didn't actually see banging a woman?

Between your earth shattering thread about homeless people sleeping in doorways and this thread, I get the feeling you are not happy living in San Francisco. Redwood City is right down the highway....MOVE!

[Delano]

61. I never said I was worried about molestation.

Maybe you've got some issue there, I don't. My kids are around gay people all the time. I would feel annoyed it if I felt I had interrupted a straight orgy. I'm not in fear of anything, I'm perturbed at inconsiderate people who think the world is their pisspot. The same goes for people who blast their boom stereos from their cars at 2 in the morning, or idiots with cellphones in movies. It is fucking inconsiderate. Living in a city means you need to have a little more consideration of those around you because there is less space.


I NEVER approached this that I had a problem with what they were doing, or that they might do anything to my kids. I'm sure that's the last thing they're interested in. But I don't want my kids to have to see that sort of thing, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Earth shattering thread about homeless sleeping in doorways? I believe it was about aggressive panhandlers, and in case you don't remember, my family and I were violently accosted by a mentally ill homeless person. Forgive the fuck out of me for not enjoying it.

I'm all for 100% tolerance of all kinds of people, but your rights end where my nose begins.

I'm delighted to be living in San Francisco. I've met tons of great people here, and more than a few have told me they get annoyed with aggressive panhandlers too. I guess they should all move to the 'burbs too.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

64. OK let me explain this again

Twice..in threads I have read about this nature i.e. the homeless thread and now this, you have had people who are at a STRICT disadvantage in society and posted about YOUR annoyance at THEIR lack of sensitivity.

They should be MORE like "the civilized." In my most HUMBLE opinion, people play civilized when "civilization" recognizes them.


I also believe you DID post this in that tone early up in the thread. Your kids are going to see all sorts of things. Wanting to protect them is normal..no problem there.

As far as your request for consideration, certainly you wouldn't compare a handful of guys doing what they MAY have been doing hiding out of site so as to NOT offend with people that deliberately disturb the peace with loudspeakers or disrupt in a threater...are you? Seems to me one MAY have been considering your delicate sensibilities and the latter two weren't.

Finally, for all you know they were making out and it got a bit heavy; something I see straight people do with impunity everyday. I see that and wonder why it's just good ole amore with them and a potential crime with us.

Since you admitted further up that you did NOT see what they were doing but could guess....it's only a guess, you can't safely estimate it's accuracy since it was a guess... your every opinion sounds reasonable...except it's based on a guess driven by an opinion.

Same with the homeless thread...you create an opinion based on ONE episode and then run with it as if it SHOULD control the actual frame of the conversation.

As for being for "tolerance," how I feel about that concept is: FUCK THAT. I believe one who TOLERATES is reinforcing their fundamental belief in their own superiority that they should have to tolerate others.

[Delano]

65. Superiority shmuperiority

...as though your posts don't positively OOOZE with superiority...


Anyway, I have no gripe with most of what you've said here but would like to clarify that it was not a couple guys, it was at least a dozen or more, all slinking around the bushes in every direction I looked. If it had just been one couple, this post would not be here. I realize that things like that happen.

You know, I was going to go on some more addressing your various points in detail, but I'm tired, and you obviously will go to any length to excuse any behavior, so long as it's committed by the right group, so I'll just leave it at that.

Maybe you should put me on IGNORE if I'm offending you so much.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

67. Haha! My posts OOZE with calling you on the carpet for

conclusionary threads framed by innuendo.



Anyway, I have no gripe with most of what you've said here but would like to clarify that it was not a couple guys, it was at least a dozen or more, all slinking around the bushes in every direction I looked. If it had just been one couple, this post would not be here. I realize that things like that happen.

my point is you don't know what they were doing.

You know, I was going to go on some more addressing your various points in detail, but I'm tired, and you obviously will go to any length to excuse any behavior, so long as it's committed by the right group, so I'll just leave it at that.

I excuse nobody's behavior. If they were fucking in a park, it's wrong and there are laws to enforce that. If they were sunbathing nude, there is probably an ordinance against that. If they WERE doing ANYTHING, they ceased doing what you wouldn't want your kids to see when you came upon them. Now you know not to go there. What's all the TRAUMA about?

Even your accusation about the right groups assumes facts not in evidence. And for the record, if STRAIGHT people frequented a park for that nature and I had kids, I just wouldn't GO there.

[Delano]

69. Last Call.

"And for the record, if STRAIGHT people frequented a park for that nature and I had kids, I just wouldn't GO there."

Since I don't livve anywhere near said park, that's what I intend to do. But if I lived across the street and that was the nearest park for my kids to play in, you can bet your bottom dollar I'd be calling the cops, whether the offenders were gay or straight.

Why should the people in that neighborhood not be able to use their own park? I wouldn't be surprised if most of the guys cruising there are from other parts of town...

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

71. Really? What if the gays live right across the fucking street?

There you go again...:eyes:

[Misunderestimator]

72. One who tolerates is reinforcing their own superiority...

That about sums it up. :thumbsup:

The word has always been a thorn in my side. "I don't approve of homosexuality, but I tolerate it." I've heard that many times... and, yeah FUCK THAT.

[Bertha Venation]

49. Complain to the police. Absolutely.

Don't most cities & towns have laws against sex in public places?

I don't care about the gender of the participants. Don't have sex in public. It's rude.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

58. Read the thread - he didn't actually observe sex in public places

Falsely reporting a crime can also be prosecuted

[Bertha Venation]

94. A-ha. I didn't read it carefully.

Hmm. Sheds new light. Thanks.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

50. The "unusually high numbers" thing is what makes it not OK in my opinion

Hard to be unconspicuous like that. These things should be done in private property, not a public park.

If it was just one couple sneaking into the woods to make merry, I'd think "no big deal" and steer the kids in other direction.

I hope you don't mean it was worse because it was a gay "event". A similar meeting for straight sex would be just as bad.

[Dying Eagle]

53. I would report it

Anywhere kids are, there should not be any form of sex.

[testing123]

54. Hell No! They should have at least pitched a tent!

If it's a public park NO ONE SHOULD BE HAVING SEX in it in broad daylight.

That's disgusting no matter who they are having it with.

[Delano]

62. That would've been cool with me.

"Daddy, why are those guys in there grunting like that?"

"Ah, they're just rasslin'"

;)

[bigwillq]

57. This should not be tolerated

I think you have every right to be pissed off and I would call the local police or any one else who might be able to control this matter.


There are many places, like hotel rooms and adult bookstores, that men or women can go to and use for their sexual needs.

This is sad but even sadder this type of behavior probably happens more often than some of us realize.

It's one thing if it's just a place for adults (like a private beach or park or something to that extent) but when it puts children in a position to see this stuff than I think it's just wrong.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

59. READ THIS GUY'S POSTS IN THE THREAD

He did not observe anyone having sex
he did not observe anyone doing anything
he DREW ASSUMPTIONS out of what he DID observe

He also happened to be in a park that apparently is REGULARLY frequented by gay males

He saw them in what may have been stages of undress...REVE-FUCKING-LATION...on any day of the week STRAIGHT males run around with their shirts off.

For all he knows they stepped behind the bushes to take a hit off a joint so as to NOT damage the kids.

He didn't observe ANY sexual activity.

For all he knows, the guy who told him the park wasn't for kids probably didn't like kids.

And for the record before anyone gets terribly concerned, let's not forget...97% of all sex crimes are committed by heterosexual males...the next time you see one jogging in a park in running shorts with his shirt off...call the police immediately..DANGER DANGER! :scared:

BTW, Delano...this thread is at least as good as your "homeless people in door steps" flamebait.....

[Delano]

63. Your last statement is untrue.

I've never posted a thread complaining about "homeless people in doorsteps" Do a fucking search. I have done one thread that complained about aggressive panhandling at businesses, and an incident where my family and I were violently accosted by a mentally ill homeless person. That does NOT translate into a vendetta against the homeless or even the mentally ill. If I came on complaining about being violently accosted by a freeper, you would be sympathetic as all hell, but apparently you're so deep in knee-jerk mode that you can't read a post objectively. It's really bad when freepers attack people, but if a mentally ill homeless person does it, we're supposed to just suck it up, I suppose.

"He also happened to be in a park that apparently is REGULARLY frequented by gay males"

I wish I had known that beforehand.

"He saw them in what may have been stages of undress...REVE-FUCKING-LATION...on any day of the week STRAIGHT males run around with their shirts off."

Maybe you can't tell the difference. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure of what was going on. You don't believe me, fine.

"For all he knows they stepped behind the bushes to take a hit off a joint so as to NOT damage the kids. "

Huh? My kids wouldn't know a joint from a cigarette at their age. What is your point trying to explain the weird behavior? Next time I'll bring a camcorder, then upload it so you can judge for yourself.

"He didn't observe ANY sexual activity."

Fortunately, no. And this is probably the most valid point you've made, mostly you're just throwing around personal insults. And I'm sure as hell not obsessed enough with this incident to go over there and try to collect evidence or something.

"For all he knows, the guy who told him the park wasn't for kids probably didn't like kids."

No, the expression on his face spoke volumes. He was kind enough to tell me what was going on, and I thanked him. He didn't have to be explicit, and I didn't give him a hard time about it. *IF* I were the type of person who hung around in parks to get my rocks off, and a saw a family with kids coming, I'd go over and warn them. But that's just how I am.

"And for the record before anyone gets terribly concerned, let's not forget...97% of all sex crimes are committed by heterosexual males..."

What is the thing with sex crimes? I never mentioned that. I'm all for any kind of sex gay or straight, vanilla or pervy. Just be considerate and keep it to yourself. I have never thought or said that gays were child molesters. Catholic priests, yes, but not gays.

Not wanting to expose your kids to certain things at certain ages is NOT the same as accusing people of being molesters! Is this what you get off on, trying to read things into people's writings that are *NOT THERE*? You've done it with the homeless thread and now this one.

"the next time you see one jogging in a park in running shorts with his shirt off...call the police immediately..DANGER DANGER! :scared:"

It was 60 degrees or so and foggy and breezy that day. Not my ideal weather to lie around shirtless in the shade, but hey, different strokes.

I will say this. If your motivation for these atttacks is to stop the stereotype that most gays ddo this sort of thing, I think it's admirable, and I'll just suck it up.

But if you are doing this because you actually think this kind of behavior is okay, but you don't have a leg to stand on to defend it, so you'd rather just use the red herring of homophobia, then you're being dishonest, and that's a shame.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

66. OK, let's do this one point by point

DELANO: I've never posted a thread complaining about "homeless people in doorsteps" Do a fucking search. I have done one thread that complained about aggressive panhandling at businesses, and an incident where my family and I were violently accosted by a mentally ill homeless person. That does NOT translate into a vendetta against the homeless or even the mentally ill. If I came on complaining about being violently accosted by a freeper, you would be sympathetic as all hell, but apparently you're so deep in knee-jerk mode that you can't read a post objectively. It's really bad when freepers attack people, but if a mentally ill homeless person does it, we're supposed to just suck it up, I suppose.



NSMA :Here is the opening post of the thread (it was a poll) and the manner in which you FRAMED the post. {emphasis added by me)

Poll question: How should homeless folks outside of businesses be treated?

I live in San Francisco, which is famous for its huge numbers of completely bonkers homeless folks. You have to run a gauntlet through them just to get into a store or a fast-food joint. They're often aggressive, and sometimes threatening.

Apparently, the city of SF has not intention of ever doing anything about obnoxious vagrants. The tolerance and liberalism of this city is one of its strongest suits, but personally, I think they've let the homeless problem get out of hand. New York isn't nearly as bad.

This is such a wonderful town but it's sad that the homeless make it so squalid. There are certain storefronts that just REEK of urine. I've been homeless briefly, and I did my best to keep clean, and would never piss in a place like that. At least find a bush ( ) away from foot traffic...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=1201215

You FRAMED the entire thread with that post, not a post about you being assaulted. Somewhere around post 13, you mention an incident at a bus stop....it DID NOT frame the thread..it was an ASIDE to JUSTIFY the positions you offered after the fact as though striving to support your attitude...even the facts in THAT post are vague.

Delano: If I came on complaining about being violently accosted by a freeper, you would be sympathetic as all hell, but apparently you're so deep in knee-jerk mode that you can't read a post objectively. It's really bad when freepers attack people, but if a mentally ill homeless person does it, we're supposed to just suck it up, I suppose.

If you want to use that stupid argument then I'll respond with the typical stupid response: I personally think it is interesting that you can defend a freeper before a societally disadvantaged person...more of that good ole sense of parity.


"He also happened to be in a park that apparently is REGULARLY frequented by gay males"

I wish I had known that beforehand.

I thought you said you had no problem with gay people in general? (start dancing ;) )

"He saw them in what may have been stages of undress...REVE-FUCKING-LATION...on any day of the week STRAIGHT males run around with their shirts off."

Maybe you can't tell the difference. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure of what was going on. You don't believe me, fine.

No you aren't - you already admitted such. You guessed.

"He didn't observe ANY sexual activity."

Fortunately, no. And this is probably the most valid point you've made, mostly you're just throwing around personal insults. And I'm sure as hell not obsessed enough with this incident to go over there and try to collect evidence or something.

How is pointing out what you DIDN'T see a personal insult? Do you cry at depositions?

"For all he knows they stepped behind the bushes to take a hit off a joint so as to NOT damage the kids. "

Huh? My kids wouldn't know a joint from a cigarette at their age. What is your point trying to explain the weird behavior? Next time I'll bring a camcorder, then upload it so you can judge for yourself.

1.) How would they know what your kids would recognize and not recognize?

2) What weird behavior? Some guys were behind a brushy area. Partially clothed and got clothed when you came through. You can't attest to what you saw because you didn't SEE it. You saw SOMETHING then extrapolated. Educated guess or not, you didn't see it. You already said so. I think seeing things you didn't see is weird behavior.

"For all he knows, the guy who told him the park wasn't for kids probably didn't like kids."

No, the expression on his face spoke volumes. He was kind enough to tell me what was going on, and I thanked him. He didn't have to be explicit, and I didn't give him a hard time about it.

My impression is that he had an expression on his face and the meaning you added to it was the one that fit best with YOUR view.

*IF* I were the type of person who hung around in parks to get my rocks off, and a saw a family with kids coming, I'd go over and warn them. But that's just how I am.

Yes..a considerate guy who gets his rocks off and a beacon for family values; how very yin-yang.

Look...IF you were that kind of guy..you like them would scatter and clothe yourself no matter how heroically altruistic you say you would be now. And notice how you described them again...like Chester the Molester..maybe you are just unaware of your own ability to language in a telling manner. :shrug:

What is the thing with sex crimes? I never mentioned that. I'm all for any kind of sex gay or straight, vanilla or pervy. Just be considerate and keep it to yourself. I have never thought or said that gays were child molesters. Catholic priests, yes, but not gays.

Res ipsa loquitur


Not wanting to expose your kids to certain things at certain ages is NOT the same as accusing people of being molesters!

If they wouldn't know the difference between a cigarette and a joint, would they really know what THEY observed?


Is this what you get off on, trying to read things into people's writings that are *NOT THERE*? You've done it with the homeless thread and now this one.

Nope. I've pretty well worked with what was there or with what was there before you edited.



I will say this. If your motivation for these attacks is to stop the stereotype that most gays ddo this sort of thing, I think it's admirable, and I'll just suck it up.

But if you are doing this because you actually think this kind of behavior is okay, but you don't have a leg to stand on to defend it, so you'd rather just use the red herring of homophobia, then you're being dishonest, and that's a shame.


My motivation is to get you to realize that YOU STEREOTYPE people...frame conversations with your stereotypes and then pretend one occasion justifies your stereotypes even when you didn't see what you interpreted as HAVING seen.

Any questions?

[Delano]

68. Like I said - please put me on ignore if I bug you that much.

I don't think you're approaching this honestly, and you don't think I am.

I don't use the ignore button, but I'm tired of responding to your pretzel-twisted logic.

If you think that public sex in parks is okay, then just say so. If you think that people who come across it should just move on and forget about it, just say that. You want to second-guess what I saw or didn't see to avoid the actual question.

You are trying to create an inquisition over nuances in the way I express myself that you don't care for. You interpret them in a certain way, and that's fine. I know what I mean, and I didn't set out to offend here. You call it flamebait, but I don't see many others taking the bait besides you.

Looking back on the homeless thread you posted, I may have to plead guilty of using the stereotype that all homeless are aggressive. (But that doesn't excuse the aggressiveness, which is what the thread was about.)

I disagree that I've stereotyped gays. To the contrary, it was YOU who brought the idea of molestation and sex crimes into it. That never even occurred to me. YOU are the one stereotyping, assuming that ALL straight people think that ALL gay people are molesters.

I can be sloppy in expressing myself, as I said. I realized pretty quick that it was wrong to ask gays to answer for the actions of these few, as though they had anything to do with it.

But I don't for a minute think that most gays act like this, anymore that I think no straight people act like this. It just so happens it was a group of men I ran into that day.

I'm tired. Good Night.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

70. They arent NUANCES they are the manner in which you language

yourself..and the manner in which YOU LANGUAGE yourself speaks VOLUMES more than the look on the face of the guy in the park who simply told you "NO."

Stop putting it all off on me and check your own communications throughout this thread.

And NO..I see no reason to put you on ignore..I'd rather challenge that which you refer to as sloppy...I'll help you be neater if you'd like.

[Misunderestimator]

74. I know I shouldn't laugh, but that was funny

Way to frame an argument!!

[Misunderestimator]

73. It was interesting enough when you changed the original title...

To remove the word Gay and in the text to remove the underlying homophobia. And... later even to apologize for it. But your subsequent posts have proven that that re-write of yours belied your real homophobia. So... to answer your question... yes, you are being a bigot to be annoyed at this, to the extent you are.

[BiggJawn]

75. We have a "Blow-Job Park" here, too.

Once a year the cops raid it, but other than that, it's pretty much common knowledge that you only go there if you want your helmet polished by another guy.

And I don't think it's exactly right.The county taxpayers shouldn't be forced to provide a place for strangers to suck each other.
But I'm a str8 guy, so what do I know about gay sex? Maybe it's better outdoors or something...

[Misunderestimator]

76. Groooann

That was a joke right? County taxpayers aren't paying for a place for strangers to fuck, anymore than they pay for cleaning up sidewalks and building walls in cities where MEN pee in public (among sooo many other things)... but what do I know about male peeing... maybe it's better outdoors or something... :shrug:

[BiggJawn]

80. No, it's NOT a joke.

I'm not being judgmental here, hear me out.
Fact: County taxpayers pay for the maintainence of a park along the river.
Fact: Said park has a reputation for being a "Cruising Spot", THE place for Gay men to go to pick up some "strange".
Fact: almost all the locals know you don't take the kids to that park for a picnic, and they shun the place.

So where do you see the disconnect? You could say the same thing if a group of proslytizing Fundies took over the park and accosted everyone who came there. a group "takes over" a public place and makes using it unpleasant for others.

Tax dollars pay for the park, some of the county residents make the park unusable for others.

And your trying to equate men fucking in a public park with men pissing on sidewalks is specious. Maybe in YOUR town, but here in my city, we don't have neighbourhoods that have a reputation as being the place to go if you want to piss on a sidewalk. THAT would be a closer analogy.

[Misunderestimator]

82. I'm saying what they are doing is illegal...

and if it is a problem, then more police should be assigned to patrol the area... There was a small beach where I just moved from that had such a reputation, and they cleaned it up and put one guy out there to guard, and voila, no problem.

And just for the record... it was your off-handed remark "But I'm a str8 guy, so what do I know about gay sex? Maybe it's better outdoors or something..." that inspired my post.

As for my analogy being specious (and I do so like that word)... I'm talking about citizens breaking laws by doing stupid things like fucking in public places or peeing in public (or soooooo much worse). Sometimes laws need to be enforced and citizens have a right to report crimes... if enough do, hopefully the police will act (if there are enough left).

if you go and read the original post... absolutely not one sighting of anyone fucking, or sucking... you just MADE that assumption because they were men, and therefore, since you don't know anything about gay sex, you assumed that these blow-job parks are universal... oh, and by the way... have you ever actually seen anyone fucking in blow-job park... or are you just going on the reputation?

And... you know, there probably are places that have a reputation as being a place to go to piss... I know I've seen them in NY.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

88. No worries, BJ....as a long term high income paying taxpayer,

I get sick of paying for that county clerk's office to process all those marriage licenses I am not allowed to have recognized....I don't think I should be forced to pay for the foreplay to y'all's divorces. ;)

[Misunderestimator]

89. Hear hear....

wish I'd said that... :bounce:

[BiggJawn]

90. Oh, never mind....

Why is it lately that the ONLY way I can get a response to a post is to piss somebody off?

You do know, don't you, that I hope you can get a marriage license SOON (even though I'm in one of those moods this week, and why ANYONE would want to get married in the FIRST place is beyond me)don't you?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

93. I know..but you're cute when you're pissed off )

;) You know I love you buddy...my fundamental argument in this thread is NOT that some gay guys should be able to fuck in parks. It was the manner in which the thread was originally framed, the fact that he didn't see what he claimed to see and originally presented it as though he did, the derogatory jargon he has used throughtout while playing TOLERANCE, and the fact that I wonder if this topic would be the LEAST bit threadworthy if he happened upon a straight couple getting hot and heavy which one can find on a So Cal beach ANY day of the week.

It's smacks of hysteria cloaked in justifications for the hysteria.

[BiggJawn]

101. Straight couples get hot and heavy on the BEACHES????

Me and my trusty, rusty video camera are on our way! :evilgrin:

I just hope the first guy I see groping a woman isn't the Governor!:P

I should keep my fingers off the keyboard on these "controversial" threads until AFTER the coffee kicks in!
:-)

[Misunderestimator]

95. LOL

:toast: Nice to meet you :)

[BiggJawn]

91. Oh, crap. the dreaded "Double Post"!

Ignore This.

[LiberalManiacfromOC]

77. not in a public park

n/t

[sus]

78. broad daylight in a park is ridiculous. at least take it to

a rest stop or something. or Gold's Gym.

I have friends out your way who would never do something like that.

[sniffa]

79. can't they find a highway rest stop?

[Skittles]

81. no, it is disgusting

gay or not, people should keep their sex lives private.

[sniffa]

83. wanna cyber?

[Skittles]

84. lol

not at this moment. :D

[Renew Deal]

85. You should call the cops.

They shouldn't be having sex in the park and there isn't an inch of the park that you shouldn't be allowed to use.

[Misunderestimator]

87. He never saw anyone having sex... he made an assumption

"I got the sense that this was a park used for sex by promiscuous men"

You know... it could have been teenagers making out, just like anyone of us might have done... or it could have been some secret college society thing going on in the bushes... OR it could have been a bunch of guys having sex... the point is that he didn't know, didn't see one thing other than a circumstantial sense that it was guys having sex.

But, you're right, people shouldn't have sex in the park.

[Renew Deal]

96. It doesn't matter what it was.

If they tell her she can't go there, she should call the cops.

[Misunderestimator]

97. No argument there... if there had been a crime...

Although, I think that someone suggesting that I might not want to walk a certain direction in the park would be doing me a favor. A bit over the top to run to the cops because some stranger makes a suggestion. But if he had actually witnessed a crime... that's another story

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

98. And where exactly did anyone tell HIM he can't go there?

He asked if it were an appropriate place for his kids and the guy said "no."

Again, it would be nice if we all stuck to the facts at hand of which there are very few.

[Renew Deal]

103. If someone told you that it's an inappropriate place to take your kids...

would you go there? I think not. It would also be nice to take the emotion out. If someone tells you that a part of the park is inappropriate and you think something is going on, you should call the cops. Let them sort it out. What if that part of the park is a problem because someone was raping a girl? What if they are crackheads? What if it's anything? I don't care if you are straight, gay or asexual, you should be able to use the park. And no one has a right to deny you a part of the park for something not "appropriate."

[YellowRubberDuckie]

86. Here in Oklahoma...

There's a park in Oklahoma City called Will Rogers Park, and you don't take your kids there after dark because it is for people who want to have sex in public, usually gay men, but I don't know if there are straight people there too. A few years back, one of guys that works at the local CBS affiliate got caught soliciting an undercover male cop. He's now doing talk radio in Tulsa, after a short stint in prison. He was also on cocaine, but that's another topic.
Please DO call your local PD to complain. Public parks are for families and children to enjoy. Not for people who want to perform sex acts in public, which is skanky and sickening, no matter who's doing it, gay or straight. Those idiots are the ones who give ALL gays a bad name.
Duckie

[Bridget Burke]

92. Next time, leave the kids at home....

Since you seem to have found this so fascinating. Perhaps you'll get to see some of the good stuff. How many of these men are "out" and how many are closet cases, furtively indulging in what they can't get at home?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

99. zing

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

107. Closet cases can't get a hotel room?

Give me a break. Public sex is illegal for a reason.

[Duncan Grant]

109. There was no public sex. Period. n/t

[supernova]

100. No, I don't condone public sex

by straights or gays. GET A ROOM or your own backyard.

[Padraig18]

102. The original poster was tombstoned.

FYI. :)

[Misunderestimator]

104. Oh..... LOL

:bounce:ing on the tombstone

[Duncan Grant]

105. Odd weather we're having in San Francisco these days.

<Over the weekend, I was out with the kids in the car, and we found ourselves at the base of Buena Vista Park, a park that is a big forested hill.> post #1

<It was 60 degrees or so and foggy and breezy that day. Not my ideal weather to lie around shirtless in the shade, but hey, different strokes.> post #63

I had relatives visiting this past weekend and the weather was beautiful - warm and sunny - no fog either. On Saturday and Sunday I took pictures at Twin Peaks, Ocean Beach, the Golden Gate Bridge, Coit Tower, etc. I was just getting ready to ask Delano what time this past weekend did this alleged gay orgy take place...and now there's a tombstone (damn). And I was looking forward to posting a few pictures of our beautiful weather.

Anyway DU, don't believe everything you read or hear. Many of you assumed that this man stumbled upon sex in the park when he clearly did not. Let's not be so quick to rush to judgement in the future...

[Misunderestimator]

106. YEAH!

Perfect eulogy!! :bounce:

[Renew Deal]

108. I forgot that everyone on DU is a liar.

I understand that you can't trust everything you hear on the web, but I don't assume everyone is lying too.

[Duncan Grant]

110. You should absolutely give people the benefit of the doubt.

But it doesn't hurt to take it with a grain of salt. The OP never said he saw public sex in the park although a few people here assumed that he did.

And - I never said that everyone on DU is a liar. I said that DU shouldn't rush to judgment. Big difference.

[Renew Deal]

111. I know

I just think that most people that post here are honest. I don't assume they are lying. I've been wrong about that sort of thing before.

[Duncan Grant]

112. My hope is that the next incendiary gay thread will receive better scrutiny

and like you, Bleachers7 - I think that most people that post here are honest. :hi:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

113. Once one posts a number of inconsistencies in their story

only a nincompoop would give them the benefit of the doubt...if a crime HAD occurred and I were the DA...I'd probably keep the poster off the witness stand if I wanted a conviction...

[Renew Deal]

114. I didn't read all of his posts.

I was actually pretty surprised to see this person get bounced. I guess he was a bad boy.

[slutticus]

116. Really?

Man. Just for this or was he involved in other situations that I'm not aware of?

I've read some of his old posts....they don't seem that bad....

Just curious

[NightTrain]

115. You're not being a bigot at all!

Those men were being inconsiderate assholes!

[Moderator]

117. Alrighty then

This has gone on entirely long enough. Locking due to the dead horse's ghost haunting my dreams, begging to not be beaten any longer...