Showing posts with label Gay Sex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay Sex. Show all posts

March 18, 2017

Fl Suprme Ct Allows Men-Men Sexual Intercourse to be Sex-How to believe Ur Partner

Don’t call them homosexuals, call them in love (photo translation)…… in Florida, they are not able to have sexual intercourse

As I read this story in two different publications, one in Miami and on in the Keys. I noticed the two describe the story with different facts,  the full story is easily understood if you reed the two on line publications. It happens all the time. So I will give you the main points Im making by publishing this important article and what it should mean to us. Publisher

  • Florida is a backwards state as far as the government is, I  lived there for 17 yrs., I know.  It was back then and still today. Most of the people there also know it too,  that is why I don’t think I’m offending too many people there, particularly when I tell you why Im saying this. “Sexual intercourse according to the law is only between a man and a woman.” Which means intercourse between men is not recognized. There cannot be rape between two man or just simple sex. It’s impossible according to this old law still in the books and still used.       You will learn more on this article.
  • Sometimes when we want to believe something is true, we see as true (and the opposite). We need to go by facts and facts do not become facts until checked. Even if you can’t get someone medical records there other ways. There ways to find out if a document has been change. One way it to show to your doctor and he/she can give you an idea the way the report reads. Accepting one page is not good enough. My ex and I used to go to Doctor’s appointments together sometimes, particularly at the beginning of the relationship. He was aware of my medical condition as I told it to him and I was aware of his. Once you tell your doctor he/she will agree in most states. Medical history belongs to you and you can share it with whomever you decide.
  • If your partner is secretive as you try to get to know him/her then is on you to go in that place with your eyes closed. Secretive partners do not become more open with time but less and will used the secretive history to justify the way he/she is. It took me years to learn my ex partner was bipolar. The questions I asked of him he made up the answers as he went along. Still because he was lying when he didn’t have too I should have attributed that to a bigger problem. I just loved him and wanted to see someone wonderful. It was until it was too late when I could no longer put up with it and it took 5 years for me to not want to spend one more day with him not even in separate room in the same house. This was the beginning in my becoming for my first time homeless and I spent all the money I had in living in a motel.       We had house and land, horse, animals, all, acquired thru me. Is taken years to get out of that hole and I have.. but some mistakes last forever on our time here. It’s not too difficult to do things right. No need to be offensive or put up stupid walls that you will probably wont feel too good when you are old (hopefully not fat too, yes I said fat-it kills just like cigarette smoking), and you find yourself lonely and no one seems to want you and the one you want will shake hands but that is all they will touch and not too hard.   Adam GonzalezPublisher
A 2011 case in which a Key West man is charged with knowingly risking infecting his partner with the HIV virus after forging medical records may move forward now that the Florida Supreme Court has ruled on the legal definition of sex.

Gary Debaun, 65, allegedly risked his partner with the virus that causes AIDS and a legal definition of sexual intercourse can’t get him out of the charge, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday in a six-page decision based solely on whether intercourse is defined as only sex between a man and a woman.

“The term ‘sexual intercourse’ is commonly understood to broadly refer to several sex acts — including the sexual act at issue here,” according to the court ruling. “In certain contexts, the term refers to specifically — that is, more narrowly, to penile-vaginal intercourse.”

The Monroe County State Attorney’s Office plans to revive the case against Debaun, who was arrested Aug. 11, 2011, after his partner called police to report Debaun had known he had HIV but presented a phony lab report that said he wasn’t.

“We have been anxiously awaiting the Florida Supreme Court’s decision and now can proceed once again with our prosecution against Mr. Debaun,” said Assistant State Attorney Colleen Dunne.

Debaun is charged with a third-degree felony for unlawful sexually transmission of a disease. It carries no minimum prison term upon conviction.

Debaun’s then-partner, identified in court records only as C.M., had asked Debaun to provide him with a lab report confirming he was not HIV-positive before consenting to sex. Nothing in the court record says C.M. contracted HIV.

During a recorded phone call with police listening in, Debaun(pictured above) admitted everything, according to prosecutors.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the 2013 ruling by the 3rd District Court of Appeal, which had overturned Judge Wayne Miller’s decision to toss the case based on the defense team’s argument that Florida’s legal definition of sexual intercourse didn’t apply to the same-sex couple’s relations.

But the Supreme Court said the Legislature created the statute to reduce the spread of HIV and wouldn’t have written a law meant to only apply to heterosexuals and ignore the group most severely affected by the disease, gay and bisexual men.

January 5, 2017

Moonlight UK -Can Gay Sex in A Movie be Less in$$ than Straight Sex and Why?

 I wrote a big introduction to this article by Guy Lodge and posted on The Guardian  but I scrapped it.  Gay sex on the movies it’s a subject in which I feel there is too much hypocrisy from the so called straight world. Studies done show movie makers can make more money if they don’t show gay scene a la straight mode; In other words show the parts or the rendition of the mechanism of love making between two guys. I have a thesis for that but is not backed up by any study I’m aware of and it could be bias in my part so I will just show you this article that appeared on the Guardian UK. I think it does some justice to this theme.

Nearly one year ago, as Oscar voters were weathering a second straight year of criticism for the lack of diversity among their nominees, the notion of a film like Moonlight emerging as an Oscar frontrunner might have seemed fanciful. The Academy may not be unremittingly allergic to stories of contemporary black lives – Precious and Boyz N the Hood cracked their radar – just as they haven’t always been entirely blind to LGBT narratives. But neither is among their, shall we say, areas of expertise, and in a year where even the reserved, elegantly upholstered white lesbianism of Todd Haynes’s Carol proved too discomfiting for a best-picture nomination, you wouldn’t have bet the house on a coming-out story centred on a disenfranchised African-American man in contemporary Miami

 Yet, as we head into the climax of awards season, Barry Jenkins’s film is shaping up to be a sure Oscar nominee in the top-tier categories, and the chief opposition to Damien Chazelle’s presumed field-leader La La Land. Not since Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain was famously and infuriatingly beaten to the gong by that everyone’s-a-little-bit-racist sermon Crash has gay cinema had quite such an optimistic shot at the industry’s top honour. And while $12.8m (£10.4m) is a modest number in the grand scheme of things, it’s an extraordinary gross for a film of its particular demographic focus – an encapsulation of multiple interests not accounted for in Donald Trump’s America. 
  However, as Moonlight gains in momentum and cultural currency, there’s a danger in piling too much symbolic weight on its unapologetically slender shoulders: it’s an intimate character study, not an all-encompassing social dissertation. Nor should it be heralded as some kind of flag-bearer for new queer cinema, heartening as its mainstream success is for the movement. Because although the film’s depiction of emerging alternative sexuality may be beautifully articulated and modulated, there’s a level of cautiousness that has enabled its broader acceptance thus far: it’s a gay romance with no on-screen sexual activity beyond an unseen handjob. That may be an apt level of extremity for a story hinged on repression, but it’s hard to imagine an equally accomplished, more explicit study of down-low sexuality among African-American men garnering quite as much popular acclaim. Meanwhile, Dee Rees’s marvellous 2011 film Pariah, a story of a teenage African-American lesbian’s self-acceptance that bears thematic and stylistic comparison to Moonlight in many respects, could only have dreamed of this red-carpet rollout.
Jenkins, who is straight, has spoken of his trepidation over steering an LGBT narrative: “I think there are some stories that can only be told from a first-person perspective,” he told Vulture. “[But] if there’s ever going to be a space where I can truly empathise with a character who has a core aspect of his identity that I don’t share, it’s going to be this case.” That empathy, the potential to recognise of one’s own needling social non-conformities in those of others, is what Moonlight’s makers and publicists have, wisely, talked up from the beginning. The Paris Review typified the approach of many critics in labelling it “everybody’s protest film”.

Of course, there is both room and need in queer cinema for films that universalise the experience of homosexuality as well as ones that explicitly localise it. As more LGBT-themed works reach cinemas than ever before, the most exciting possibility is that queer film may develop its own increasingly wide mainstream-to-niche spectrum, rather than occupying a single specialised corner of the arthouse. If Matthew Warchus’s rousing, upbeat Pride – shown on British TV over the Christmas break – is currently a go-to option as a progressive gay film you can safely watch with your gran, perhaps future years will appoint an Oscar-gilded Moonlight as gateway viewing for curious viewers into more esoteric and/or erotic portraits of homosexuality.
At present, while claims of a golden age of queer cinema may seem too idealistic, the menu is a healthily broad one, with non-English-speaking filmmakers leading the charge most adventurously. The French, unsurprisingly, treat frank queer sexuality on screen with a casual shrug. Alain Guiraudie’s unique quasi-Hitchcockian thriller Stranger By the Lake, which sets a serial killer on the loose in a bucolic cruising ground of freely rutting men’s bodies and calmly gazes upon the hot, nasty fallout, was not just a substantial hit, but was amply recognised in the country’s Oscar-equivalent César awards; no film of remotely comparable gay content has ever passed the Academy barrier. (Guiraudie’s eccentric follow-up, Staying Vertical hits UK cinemas this year and is equally fearless: without straying too far into spoiler territory, it has perhaps the most lethal scene of gay anal intercourse ever put on screen.)

Theo et Hugo.
 Theo et Hugo.

Last year’s most eye-opening queer release was Olivier Ducastel and Jacques Martineau’s Theo and Hugo, which opens with an 18-minute gay orgy in a Paris sex club, before its title characters introduce themselves and woo each other, Before Sunrise-style, across a night of walking, talking and one panicked HIV clinic drop-in. Achieving a tender romanticism in a manner that seems thoroughly infeasible during its hardcore opening salvo, it’s a film with little interest in making the gay experience accessible or palatable to audiences of all stripes; at the screening I attended, the walkouts during the first few minutes, by viewers who may well have warmed to the film’s ensuing, fully clothed love story, were numerous. It’s rare for a film to portray the urban realities of gay sex, dating and Grindr culture this candidly and cheerfully; it’s tempting to view the film as a litmus test for the extent of straight viewers’ empathy.
Across the globe, Park Chan-wook, not a gay or even expressly queer filmmaker, but an all-purpose connoisseur of kink, has been lavished with US critics’ awards (and robust arthouse box office) for The Handmaiden, a sly, sinuous and unabashedly sexy reinvention of Sarah Waters’ bestseller Fingersmith, relocating that yarn of Victorian lesbian skulduggery to Japanese-occupied Korea and adding a number of its own fetishistic fixations with bondage and antique erotica. It’s grandly entertaining, artfully lurid stuff, and not remotely shy of its own horniest impulses: Park’s fascination with bodies, and how we pleasure and abuse them, gets an acrobatic workout here.
Unsurprisingly, he has taken flak in certain critical quarters for offering a straight male gaze on intimate lesbian activity; empathy, in the sense that Jenkins describes in the aforementioned interview, is not heavily on The Handmaiden’s mind, although such jabs glide over Park’s recurring identification with otherness and perversion in his cinema.

The Handmaiden.
 The Handmaiden.

Straight French filmmaker Abdellatif Kechiche faced similar pushback – from Steven Spielberg no less – over the extended, undeniably arousing lesbian sex sequences in 2013’s closeup coming-out epic Blue Is the Warmest Colour, which broke out of the queer market to become an across-the-board art house conversation piece after landing the Palme d’Or at Cannes. 
The line between praising non-LGBT filmmakers for placing a sympathetic lens on queer lives and accusing them of exploitation can be a fine one, played out in a series of backlashes and counter-backlashes. Meanwhile, a respectfully restrained approach can find itself in hot water, too. Straight filmmaker Ang Lee was taken to task by many queer critics for playing Brokeback Mountain’s key scene of campsite sodomy too gingerly; Todd Haynes, while among the most forthrightly queer American filmmakers of his generation, was thought by some to have emphasised more caution than lust in Carol’s heavy-breathing but tastefully blocked sex scenes. Both films saw their tact (and, of course, their ample artistic merits) rewarded with major releases and prominent publicity, just as Moonlight has done; with a £145m worldwide box office, Lee’s film stands as the highest-grossing gay drama of all time.
Of course, you could argue that mainstream cinema has become more averse to sex of all persuasions; even the much-ballyhooed straight erotica of Fifty Shades of Grey had a few more buttons done up than it would have done in the days when Basic Instinct was a blockbuster. Uninhibited visions of queer sexuality in the multiplex may be many decades off, if even a prospect. But interest, awareness and, yes, empathy among general audiences is growing and should continue to do so as predominantly liberal Hollywood finds ways to assert itself under Trump rule. (The prospect of a boyfriend for glibly blokey but supposedly pansexual superhero Deadpool in the upcoming sequel, as repeatedly teased by star Ryan Reynolds, may not be treated as the most sincere of gestures by gay audiences.) Still, if the Academy and the major studios keep meeting queer cinema in the middle, we may be pleasantly surprised by what a little Moonlight can do.
 Moonlight opens in the UK on 17 February and The Handmaiden on 14 April

December 13, 2016

How To make A Bed Scene with Gay Sex Virgin Daniel Radcliffe

John Krokidas, Kill Your Darlings
In his first big post-Potter sex scene, Daniel Radcliffe plays the writer Allen Ginsberg as a young college student on a voyage of self-discovery: Obsessed with the beautiful best friend (Dane DeHaan) who strings him along, Ginsberg ultimately strikes out on his own and loses his virginity to a man he meets in a bar.
Growing up with queer films, there was always some sort of stigma attached to gay characters or gay sexuality, and I didn't want the sex scene to feel like that in any way. I wanted the arc of the scene to go from nervousness to a place of pure enjoyment to a realization that this would ultimately become a formidable part of his identity. Allen Ginsberg was one of the most renowned gay artists of the 20th century, and I felt that not including his sexuality as part of the story would be a crime. He wore it unabashedly on his sleeve and helped establish queer sexuality as something you could even talk about in art and literature, so the scene was incredibly important to capture right.
Dan had no issue with doing the scene whatsoever. His only question was, "Just so I know, how naked do you want me to be … movie-naked, or Equus-naked?" I said, "I hate when people block sex scenes in order to play hide-the-genitalia — that feels so forced. So let's just block it, and if it falls into frame, we'll shoot it." But then I remember going, "Oh shit: You're British, and Allen Ginsberg is one of the most famous Jews of the 20th century. On second thought, I don't think we're going to go Equus-naked." And Dan said, "John, my mother's Jewish and I'm circumcised. Play the scene any way you want.” God bless Daniel Radcliffe, he commits to all of his actions.
I knew we needed to nail the blocking. If we got that down and rehearsed it enough times with clothes on, there would be less time having to put two naked men in awkward positions with certain body parts pressed up against each other in a way that would make the actors feel self-conscious. I could tell people were getting a little bit nervous and antsy, so in my attempt to bring some levity to the situation, I said, "Let's do this with stand-ins, and I'll be one of the stand-ins." And I asked Reed Morano, my cinematographer — I was very close to her by that time — to do it with me.
They always say to directors that your actors will follow you if you do whatever you're asking them to do, and ultimately, it was really helpful: By doing it ourselves, we could show the actors exactly what we needed from their blocking … although I thought that when I was the top and Reed was the bottom, it could look a little wrong, gender-wise. So I let her take the dominant position, and in the middle of this blocking, with my legs in the air and Reed on top of me, that was when I really realized we were feigning intercourse in front of our entire crew. We both looked at each other like, Is this the moment we're always going to remember from this set? But it's also the moment that cemented our friendship. Once you've simulated sex with your director of photography, what else do you have to hide from each other?

Photo: A24

Drake Doremus, Equals
In a futuristic world where sex and emotions are verboten, Silas (Nicholas Hoult) feels unfamiliar stirrings that he comes to realize are feelings for his co-worker, Nia (Kristen Stewart). When the two of them finally get together, neither person has so much as kissed someone before, and their first rendezvous is a liberation.
First and foremost, I approach the scene from a voyeuristic standpoint. I'm guiding the actors by making them feel like they're completely liberated and in the moment, so that risks are okay. Rather than saying, “Stand here, touch her here, do this,” it's more of an exploration, and the intention is that they should lose themselves and let the scene sort of take over. If we've done our job right, it should feel like maybe we shouldn't even be there because it’s so intimate and personal.
For Kristen, the direction was pretty simple: You know you can't touch him, you know you can't be touched by him, but then there’s this exhilaration. So it’s a really interesting arc in that scene, and I'll guide those specific beats, but everything in between those moments is completely and utterly about the exploration of getting to those moments. A lot of it has to do with how we schedule the shoot, to be honest. This scene in particular, we'd been shooting for weeks, and they really hadn't touched at all until this moment. The anticipation and the tension boiling over between them just naturally finds its way into the scene, so sometimes you can just schedule things so that they pop at the right time, you know? You want to get something when it's at its fever pitch.
Music is a huge part of it as well. Oftentimes I'll be playing music just before a take if it's a dialogue scene, or even during a take, if sound doesn't matter. I'll just hide a speaker in a cupboard or in a wall and the actors won't even know it's there on the first take, and then all of a sudden, we start rolling, and music will come up. I'm kind of DJing from the monitor, so it's almost as if I'm directing them if they just follow the music, in a way. So there's little tricks and things like that.
I’m more interested in textures and skin and eyes and looks and moments, rather than all-out nudity. To be honest, on my other film, Like Crazy, we shot a lot more explicit stuff and once we got in the edit room, it just didn't find its way in. To me, a love scene isn’t really about the sexual nature of their experience — it’s a lot more about the emotional experience. It’s about realizing what it’s like to fall in love.


November 16, 2016

Sex in the Bushes

In light of the Project Marie police sting in Etobicoke’s Marie Curtis Park, Daily Xtra is re-publishing an August 2004 piece by Vancouver’s former managing editor Gareth Kirkby, called, “Park Sex is a Good Thing.” 

While the piece is Vancouver-focused, the questions it raises, and the police intrusions it challenges, certainly apply to Toronto too.

In Project Marie, Toronto Police Services sent undercover officers into Marie Curtis Park for six weeks to look for sexual activity and arrest men who allegedly solicited the officers for sex. Police charged 72 people with 89 offences. 

Read Kirkby's piece below.
“Park Sex is a Good Thing” 

Why some like sex among the ferns or the beach

While some straights and gays like to make out in the perfumed rainforests or under the open sky, some others wonder why. With Surrey police now harassing gay cruisers at Bear Creek Park, the question hangs unspoken in many media reports.

Below is a wee peek at the culture of park sex, in a question-and-answer format. The questions reflect a few of the comments I've heard from people who don't get why it is that some prefer bushes to mattresses.

Q: Can't we stay out of the parks?

A: Why should we? Sex is fun. Some people like sex in a bed; others prefer it in more adventurous locations. Gays often make and meet friends in parks; there's a major social component to park cruising. All consensual sex is good sex, and we all have our kink. Straights do park sex, too-there are loads of heteros making out in cars at Prospect Point and Ferguson Point and, in summer months, on the beach along English Bay and False Creek. This is good, too. Straights even write songs about it, like "I Found My Thrill on Blueberry Hill." They also invented the 'Mile High Club' for coupling in airplane washrooms. Straights call this 'making out'. When gays do it, society calls it 'public sex' and sometimes treats it as abnormal. What's up with that?
Q: Isn't park sex, like bathhouse sex, mainly about self-loathing closeted men and older out gay guys?

A: Not by a long shot. Sure, many straight-identified married men begin to deal with their same-sex desire at the parks and tubs and in washrooms-and what's wrong with that? But many out, proud and happy gay men like parks and tubs, too. My recent informal survey found that the parks this summer have a profound cross-section of ages-from 20 to 80. In the last couple of years, the number of younger users has increased. Clearly, park cruising is not on the decline. Probably because park sex can be fun and can enrich your life.

Many people go to parks because they're free: other ways of meeting friends or sex partners cost money-for example, restaurants, cafés, bars, bathhouses, phone-sex lines.

Q: Now that we have our rights recognized, won't we see people giving up this stuff? I thought it was a sign of internalized homophobia.

A: No, it's a sign that some people find it fun. Parks all around the world, in liberal countries and oppressive countries, are meeting places for gay men. I doubt if that will ever change-it's been happening for centuries. In countries where they clamp down on park sex, including places where police or death squads arrest and sometimes kill men for having sex in a park, men still go. It's a fact. We all need to deal with it.

Q: But I don't see why the cops should be expected to keep people safe when they're engaged in an illegal act.

A: We in the gay community get used to being second-class citizens; we accept a standard that others wouldn't-such as looking over our shoulders all the time before holding our lover's hand. If a straight couple was murdered by a fiend with a chainsaw at Prospect Point-or Bear Creek Park-do you think the straight community would suggest that they shouldn't have been making out at that location? Not a chance! They'd be calling for the arrest of the killer before others are killed. We have the right to feel safe wherever we are and we don't even feel safe at Davie and Burrard at night.

Police can keep us safe, while not interfering with our making out. We should stay off the roadway and other high-traffic areas while making out-that's just stupidity. Park staff should leave thick vegetative cover in gay cruising areas, instead of thinning them out and then inviting police to arrest people who have now been made visible. If the making out is kept off the trails, police should leave us alone. What's out of sight should be out of mind. We all know cops don't enforce all the laws they see violated on any one day. The anti-sex laws date back to a time when the whole Criminal Code reflected biblical principles; we've come a long way. Violence should be policed; consensual sex not.

Q: But these guys don't represent me. They embarrass me. They're not a part of the 'normal' gay community, are they?

A: Well, you don't represent them either and some of them might be embarrassed by 'Respect Queens.' Let's remember that all gays were considered abnormal just a few years ago. So, we should be the last to judge each other. Hey, it was the drag queens, leather men, public sex aficionados, hustlers and SM dykes who were the first out of the closet, building community, and fighting for our rights for a couple of decades. Our rights, by the way, to have sex our way. They won some of those rights and created the geography where other, more mainstream, gays and lesbians could feel comfortable coming out. We owe it all to these folks, not to the 'respect queens' who try to distance themselves from anything other than vanilla sex practiced by longterm couples in their own bed. We're a diverse community, and we should be supporting each other's choices about where to make love and how and with how many, rather than dividing into "good gays" and "bad gays." For that matter, a recent study found that only two percent of Vancouver's gay males are in longterm relationships of over seven years' duration. I think park sex is probably as 'normal' as any other way of relating in our community. Let's stop being mean to each other over how we make love.

Q: Doesn't anything bother you about park-sex lovers?

A: Actually, I think it's important to stay off trails. And I think gays, including park sex aficionados, need to be nicer to each other in public. We need to use condoms. We need to clean up after ourselves, not littering. We need to smile at each other more. And we need to look out for each other out there. If you hear someone yelling, grab a couple more gay people near you and run to help.

There's safety in numbers. We need lots of people using parks so that each individual cruiser is safer. If you’re a park lover, I say be careful out there, watch out for each other out there, but don’t let this stop you from living your life fully in the way you desire.

Read Gareth Kirkbys original piece here.
If you were charged at Marie Curtis Park during Project Marie, contact lawyer Marcus McCann at

If Gay Marriage is Legal, Why Gay Sex is Illegal in *Johnny Come Lately* Mississippi?

A new federal lawsuit could finally put an end to Mississippi’s unconstitutional sodomy law. 
The suit argues that a 2003 Supreme Court ruling, which said that gay sex was constitutionally protected by the 14th amendment, should apply to the state of Mississippi and its prohibition of “unnatural intercourse.” 
“Despite this clear proclamation made more than a decade ago, Mississippi continues to enforce its criminal statute prohibiting sodomy, titled unnatural intercourse, by requiring people convicted of unnatural intercourse to register as sex offenders and follow myriad, onerous prescriptions on their everyday life,” reads the lawsuit filed last month in Jackson.
The sodomy laws itself states: “Every person who shall be convicted of the detestable and abominable crime against nature committed with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of not more than ten years.”
In addition to blocking enforcement of the law, the federal suit seeks to remove its plaintiffs from the sex offender registry and expunge all records indicating their past inclusion. 
The suit has named Attorney General Jim Hood as one of its defendants. Hood responded in a statement that he would fight to protect the “constitutionality of [Mississippi’s] sex offender registry.” 
“The Supreme Court unequivocally declared this kind of “sodomy” statute unconstitutional thirteen years ago…[when it ruled that the] mere existence of sodomy statutes is an invitation to subject the LGBT community to discrimination,” said Center for Constitutional Rights Senior Staff Attorney Ghita Schwarz, who filed the suit alongside Jackson-based attorney Rob McDuff. 
“And yet, 13 years later, Mississippi still has an Unnatural Intercourse statute on the books, and still enforces that statute by requiring people with those convictions…to register as sex offenders for 25 years, a devastating consequence that causes enormous financial and social burdens.”
In response to the lawsuit, Special Assistant Attorney General Paul Barnes has asked to dismiss the suit with prejudice, which would prevent it from being brought back up. 
Earlier this year, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant signed HB 1523 into law, which would allow businesses to discriminate against LGBT folks on the basis of religion. Thankfully, it was eventually struck down

November 15, 2016

Toronto Police Going Undercover to Arrest Men on Men Sex

Marie Curtis Park. Photo via Flickr user Gary J. Wood

 Less than six months after Toronto police officially apologized for the 1981 bathhouse raids that targeted gay men, the cops have charged dozens of consenting adult men for having sex at a local park. 

A couple months ago, the cops undertook undercover operation Project Marie at Etobicoke's Marie Curtis Park in response to community complaints about indecent exposure and an alleged sexual assault. As a result of the investigation, through which "a number" of plain-clothed male officers hung out in the park and at times were solicited for sex, a total of 89 charges have been laid against 72 people, mostly men, according to police spokeswoman Meaghan Gray.

Very few of the charges are criminal in nature.

The majority relate to bylaw infractions and provincial offences, including 36 for engaging in sexual behaviour in a park and 33 for trespassing property. Gray said the men charged were primarily consenting adults. 

Though the charges are minor in a legal sense, they have the potential to ruin lives, according to LGBT lawyers who say the investigation is a gross overreaction by police.

"Toronto police sent undercover police officers into the bushes to wait for men to proposition them for sex so they could arrest them. In 2016," Marcus McCann, a gay Toronto-based human rights lawyer, told VICE.

"That is unacceptable."

In response to news of the operation, McCann and ten other lawyers have stepped up to offer free legal help to the men who've been charged. He said it's likely that some will plead guilty and pay their fines—which can be hundreds of dollars—rather than risk exposing themselves publicly by fighting the charges.

"There have been crackdowns on men who have sex with men in the various locations they do it for 40 years or more," said McCann. "We know for that population these kinds of charges can have very severe consequences around shame and stigma, the risk of outing, there can be employment consequences, family consequences. Something that's a fairly minor bylaw infraction has the potential to really, really disrupt lives for these men and their families."

He said depression and suicidal ideation are also potential outcomes.

Const. Kevin Ward, one of the officers who went undercover, told the Etobicoke Guardian cops aren't planning on easing up on their crackdown.

"I want anyone engaging in these illegitimate activities to know that this is no longer a safe place for this to happen. We are going to be at the park every day and we will not be tolerating it," he said.

However, some are questioning the allocation of police resources on something that didn't net many criminal charges.

"It's basically like a very expensive sting operation for jaywalking," said McCann. He noted that while police have publicly spoken about reports of men who exposed themselves to children in relation to Project Marie, child sex predators aren't who they targeted by using adult undercover officers. 

"I think the Toronto police conflation of men who have sex with men with pedophilia is truly, truly troubling." 

Gray said she could not disclose how much the police spent on Project Marie. She also couldn't say how many community complaints cops received or if there's been a spike in sexual activity at Marie Curtis Park.

She said the initiative wasn't meant to target gay men.

"We don't know the sexual orientation of any of the men who were involved, nor does it matter quite frankly," she said. "These people were engaged in behaviour that was against the law."

McCann said cops should have used a public education campaign, similar to the one they rolled out to curb drinking at Trinity Bellwoods Park. Gray said police started with that tactic, increasing their uniformed presence at the park and explaining to people what behaviour is and isn't acceptable.

Kyle Kirkup, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said for members of the LGBT community, the operation is reminiscent of the bathhouse raids.

"People may not be out to their families. To have the police kind of force them out of the closet in this way, I think the consequences are going to be really devastating," he told VICE

Kirkup, who identifies as gay, pointed to the controversy that followed Toronto's Pride Parade this past summer, when Black Lives Matter demanded that cops no longer have an institutional presence in future marches.

"I think moments like this community members think, Wow, if this is the way they're governing themselves in 2016, perhaps it's unacceptable to have the police in the parade."

He said a better approach would have been to reach out to LGBT community groups and work together to resolve the issue.

Police are planning a “Walk the Beat" event at the park on Saturday, to discuss the issue with community members.

 Manisha Krishnan       By Manisha Krishnan
Senior Writer
  This a post from vice and posted here without edits or changes.

Featured Posts

How isTrump aTerrible Pres?Don’t knowHowDemocracyWorks^Cats

Donald Trump was supposed to be the guy who would fix everything in Washington, but after two months in office he’s p...