CommunityMy FDL

Why The Need For Sting Operations

“After he flashed a badge, he would point silently to the exit. When one man said his wife was waiting at a gate, Karsnia called for a citation book to spare the man a trip to the airport police station.

“And when his bathroom stings netted a U.S. senator from Idaho, he even promised him, ‘I don’t call media.’

“That promise – which Karsnia seems to have kept – didn’t do Sen. Larry Craig much good.”

[For the full article, see here.]

I never understood why there had to be sting operations that, in effect, entrap men who have sex with men in public restrooms.  Unless there is assaultive behavior attached to that furtive sexual expression that is very highly unusual, despite Tucker Carlson’s alleged experience, I see no reason why men have to be embarrassed and/or arrested for such behavior.

Sen. Larry Craig, homophobe and hypocrite that he is, is no favorite of mine; Karsnia may be the nicest guy in the world, but we have to step back and ask why such law enforcement against such behavior is necessary, or even desireable.  If two men desire furtive, anonymous sex that is relatively unobtrusive, given the fact that these behaviors are almost always done within the context of enclosed places, or places not easily seen by an “outsider,” I see no public danger that would require law enforcement to spend its resources in bring in such “perpetrators” to “justice.”

The unfortunate reality of our largely homophobic society, equating Gay sex with shame and possible denial of reputation, loss of family, and loss of employment, has forced some men to fulfill their sexual needs in this shadowland of opportunity.  We have, in effect, created this issue in the first place by condemning same-sex activity, thereby driving certain men into the underground of sexual expression, due to its attendant shame inculcated by most of society, and then we turn around and embarrass and punish them for what we, ourselves, have created in the first place.

If Gay men, or men who, for whatever reason, felt the need for anonymous, impersonal sexual expression, were allowed to freely express their sexual needs within the context of emotional fulfillment and satisfaction, there would presumably be far less Tearoom Trade, far less socially and legally risky sexual behaviors, than now occurs in many public bathrooms and rest stops along the freeways in our Nation.

Beyond again showing the hypocrisy of many of those who scream the loudest in seeking to prevent full and equal civil rights for Gay people, this Larry Craig incident should encourage us to ask the question why we find it necessary to have police decoys looking to “entrap” men who usually feel that they have no other opportunity for sexual outlet than in public restrooms or their equivalent.  And, the first place we should look for this explanation is to ourselves and our retarded/dysfunctional attitudes toward the realities of the confluence and multidimensional dynamics of sexual orientation, sexual identification, sexual expression, and the latent and not so latent hostility we express against any type of sexual expression without the benefit of being “married,” a benefit clearly currently denied to Gay people, save Massachusetts.

It would be interesting to do a study comparing the incidence of bathroom sex in Massachusetts, and countries like Canada, that approve of same-sex marriage, with its incidence in other states of the Union.  I think the difference would be significant!

[Also posted on A Christian Voice For Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender Rights.]

Previous post

It's the Hypocrisy, Stupid

Next post

Q of the day: Is the Closet Okay for Gay-Friendly Pols?

Jerry Maneker

Jerry Maneker