07/07/2008
UK Gay Group Says Destruction of Gay Cruising Area is Discriminatory
A gay rights group of the Bristol City Council is opposing the council's plans to clear undergrowth from an area near the UK city known as the Avon Gorge (above), which is reportedly an area where gay men go to cruise and have sex. The group says that by doing away with the 'meeting area', the council is discriminating:
"The dramatic Avon Gorge is an area of is home to various species of rare plants and wildlife, but councillors said it had become overgrown over the past 20 years. Thick bushes cover the secluded area next to Circular Road, where gay men have been caught cruising for sex. The £20,000 five-year maintenance scheme was approved in January 2007 and work to remove the bushes will begin in the next three months. Tory councillor Peter Abraham hit out at the anti-gay accusations as 'offensive'. He said: 'How can it be discriminatory to clear land that might stop what is an illegal practice? 'We need to manage the Downs properly. For a long time we have been told that the scrub land needs to be opened up. 'I find it offensive to suggest that by taking this action - which might stop people collecting to carry out what some might describe as illegal acts and certainly offensive behaviour - you are being discriminatory.' The Rainbow Group refused to comment yesterday but said they stood by the comments made in the report."
Recently
Park Service: Fire Island Citations 'Not Part of a Targeted Raid' [tr]
Gay Men Arrested for Public Sex on Fire Island [tr]
Cape Cod National Seashore Targets Sex in the Dunes [tr]
Posted 10:03 AM EST by Andy Towle in Discrimination, Great Britain, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Oh, Lord....here we go again.
Oh, give me home where the homos go roam
And the trade amd closet cases can play....
"This is an ugly part of gay culture that must be ended if we're to be accepted by the greater society"
Oh, shut the fuck up.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 7, 2008 10:27:06 AM
So some fags staked out an area to suck c*ck and now they are saying they are being discriminated against - way to make it ALL about them - give me a break. I'm sure there are still plenty of toilets to have unsafe and risky rendez-vous in
Posted by: are you kidding me? | Jul 7, 2008 10:39:39 AM
Sorry, but calling this "discriminatory" is stupid. It's illegal for straight people to have sex in public, and ditto for gay people. End of story.
Posted by: Sasha | Jul 7, 2008 10:41:02 AM
Yes, Miss Derrick, here we go again, with the usual cries of "it's illegal, it's morally wrong, it's dangerous, blah blah blah."
I'm glad to see the move was protested. If it is indeed a "well known cruising area" I'm not sure how people can fail to see this as discriminatory. But obviously some people will do anything to accommodate the heterosexual majority.
Posted by: Kevinvt | Jul 7, 2008 10:58:22 AM
True, the act is illegal.
But in most areas, where else can Gays meet. They can't meet at church, on the street, at work. Because of this discrimination, they can only meet in bushes, bars and baths. One can't just walk up to someone they like and ask them for a date like het's can. One would get put in jail just for that! Exept in Germany. One can actually be civilized there and ask one out on a date. Usually a strait guy there will just take it as a compliment and simply say "no thanks".
But not GB or USA. Ohh Nooo. "How dare you ask me out." "you have soiled me just by looking at me" whine whine whine.
Every city shoule have a park like Grunberg Park. That place is heaven. The police actually DO serve and protect ALL of their citizens. Not just the evil christians.
Therefore, I feel it is discriminary to remove the few places they can meet.
Either give equal rights and protections or shut your filthy, hateful christian mouths when they meet wothout your hateful blessings.
So quit bitching about where they meet if you don't alow them any acceptable venues to meet.
Posted by: art | Jul 7, 2008 10:58:45 AM
I agree that it is stupid to call it discriminatory when sex in the bushes in illegal for everyone. They can call it oppressive if the want, but not discriminatory unless man-woman couples were ignored when doing the same thing.
I do take a double-take when news articles and/or quoted sources refer to "gay men" having sex somewhere, though. It seems that this term is usually an assumption and often an erroneous one.
Openly and honestly gay men feel free to ask other men on dates, go to gay-popular venues, meet guys through friends and work colleagues, etc.
Now, I've never gone to the bushes to look for strangers to have sex with, but my understanding is that a lot of the men who go there do NOT feel those other avenues are available.... Many are men with wives at home, men who belong to anti-gay religious or cultural communities, men who do not consider themselves gay and are afraid of being associated with anything or anyone gay.
I am sure that some of the men there are gay and consider themselves as such. But surely some are straight and curious or confused, others are bisexual, and some others may be gay deep down but won't ever admit it to themselves and/or their wives. When an article refers to a place like this where "gay men" go, it's usually an oversimplification that doesn't match reality.
Posted by: GregV | Jul 7, 2008 11:15:23 AM
Once again, I'm left speechless by the likes of "Miss Derrick" and Kevin. How can someone even attempt to defend this as a right? Perhaps you could petition the city to provide beds and clean sheets as well.
Posted by: D.R.H. | Jul 7, 2008 11:24:15 AM
We may, or may not be an endangered species, but the park is NOT out natural habitat and does NOT deserve protection on that basis. If we allow the most fringe behavior to define our entire community it's hard to make the case that we are normal people and the gay "lifestyle" is acceptable to moral people. I don't want pervs jerking off and cumming on the back of my seat on the bus. If we need to work harder to make places for a variety of people in various states of out/in/curious, then we need to work harder. If we need an "off leash" area in parks for gays to run free, well, I'll sign that petition too.
Posted by: Rikard | Jul 7, 2008 11:30:18 AM
I'm not certain that I am comprehending some of the arguments put forth in the various comments here. There are no places for modern day gays to meet? True, society (ies) have a long way to go before achieving parity, but gays have all sorts of ways to meet today. Aside from bars, there are a large number of social networks in place. We can meet through gay running groups, the gay Sierra Club, gay charities. We can meet at gay churches, gay chatrooms and gay dating sites. And if we should be so bold, we can approach one another in the lobby of a theatre showing a gay film, at a party, or (if we feel particularly brave and safe) at a grocery.
Is there a chance we will meet a gay basher? Certainly, but then that is an issue of respect and tolerance that runs through larger society at large, which seems to me to be a separate issue of thinning the growth at a public park. The issue of the brush at the park is, apparently, related to issues concerning basic "landscaping" and public sex. As pointed out by "Sasha," public sex among heterosexuals would similarly be discouraged.
If individuals feel so strongly about enjoying the freedom and dangers in having sex in a public setting, why not coalesce and work to pass laws to legalize the activity? Change the laws.
Meanwhile, part of the appeal of having sexual trists in a public setting is in the perceived danger that lurkes beyond a trimmed hedge (pun intended). Let them trim the thickets, it can only enhance the mood.
Posted by: Mike | Jul 7, 2008 11:33:50 AM
Oh, screw talk of "rights". It's about discriminatory prosecution of people who meet in public parks, beaches, etc.--to have sex there or go somewhere else. Cops will pass by ten straight couples screwing to arrest to gay guys before they even touch each other. That's what we're talking about.
And people who frequent parks don't expect any outpouring of support from "mainstream" gay guys. The issue aint that important compared to the war in Iraq (wonder if they got a sex park over there?). We just don't expect the judgemental crap from other homos.
D.R.H., what happened to "speechless"? And it's "Madam" to you.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 7, 2008 11:34:41 AM
I just love being nude and having sex outdoors. It's just feels natural to me. When it's done discreetly and out of the way, what harm is being done?
Posted by: Mark | Jul 7, 2008 11:35:44 AM
I'm all for an anything-goes sex park (a "Rompinalia"?), but I'm also pretty sure these guys can find another spot in a country as large as England. It's a shame there are few places you can have sex outside, even on private land, as the legal requirements are annoying (high fences, etc.). The average backyard just doesn't cut it.
Posted by: anon | Jul 7, 2008 11:37:49 AM
Sasha, agreed 100 percent.
OK, so you want anonymous sex and don't mind taking the risk of being beaten up or killed or mugged out in the parks with nobody there to help you out when you're in trouble. Fine, whatever.
But seriously, I can't see how anonymous hooking up in the park constitutes a "date". Gimme a break! It's risky, sleazy behavior and anyone in their right mind knows that you can meet people in a gay bar or at the baths or ONLINE if you desperately need to hook up. You don't have to hang out at some public park. I don't want to see any kind of sex act in a park any more than a straight person wants to. Sex is not supposed to be public, regardless if it's gay or straight, PERIOD. The dark ages of hiding in the woods for gay sex was over in the 80s. Let's class it up a little, eh?
It's unbelievable that some will defend ANY kind of gay behavior and call it discrimination when the police or govt. tries to curtail your public sex acts.
Wake up people! When did that suddenly become OK for us? How do you expect to get ANY respect from the straight community when you defend this kind of risky, dangerous crap?
And don't try to tell me that these guys are in the park just "meeting" and talking. We all know they are there for sex because they are closeted or just like risky behavior because they get off on it.
I just don't think this is something that can honestly be defended. It's stupid behavior and if you have any self-respect, you won't do it. There's too many SAFE options to have any excuses otherwise.
We all looked down on Larry Craig for his tap-dancing, but when we look at ourselves, it's just fine to cruise bathrooms and parks like some kind of drooling sex fiends. Yeah right, whatever. No wonder we are having a tough time being accepted and getting equal rights.
Posted by: Johnny | Jul 7, 2008 11:40:11 AM
Instead of soiling a park with dirty, sleazy, and disgusting public sex, gay men should meet in the basement of their local church or community center for arts and crafts and storytelling.
Posted by: John in Manhattan | Jul 7, 2008 11:56:13 AM
1. Since this is public land the city council has EVERY right to trim the bushes if they please. If the gays care so much why not buy land in the cities that are feeling discriminated against, plant some trees, bushes and let the sucking and fucking commence. Until then it is public land that is supported by the laws.
2. Discrimination: now that is STUPID, you took the drug seller off the street now I can not get high. Yeah I am equating it with drugs because for MANY of the gays that participate in this behavior it is an addiction. You don't carry my hair gel that is discrimination; what do you mean you don't have butter pecan that is discrimination. When I think of discrimination these are my thoughts: women rights, the right to marry (gays, interracial etc), Black, Japanese Americans during and after WWII, Irish immigrants, gays meeting indoors without the risk of being raided etc...Nope I can not find a landmark case regarding public sex. Please understand that sodomy laws were overturned with the understanding that this activity was taking place in a private setting, not a public one.
3. As a black person I remember when I graduated high school and then college...so many black people from the hood was in my face saying, "You trying to be white". Naw, I got an education and that is not a white or black thing. The same idea is I do not care to participate in public sex. Gays try to shame other gays for not being into sex in the park. Am I going to try to stop you from cruising the park; absolutely not and when you are arrested will you lodge a real life protest or is this outrage only suitable on a blog. I really do not care what you do and if you are arrested I still will not care; however keep your attempts at shame for yourself and your actions.
I find that the more someone tries to convince another is the truest lack of confidence in themselves and what they are doing.
How many of you sex positive gay men are willing to stand up for your "rights" in the real world? Get a group together, go out to your local sex park and make a stand. Yeah just what I thought you won't do it because it is not something that you are TRULY convicted on, it is just something to "rant" and "rave" about from a computer. Be the Rosa Park for the gay sex positive people, refuse to leave that bush, take a stand; organize a boycott and other political actions…lead you people to sexual freedom.
I am not going to celebrate "public sex" just like I did not celebrate my brother dropping out of school. He was not pressured to do this, not by family or the local gangs. It was something he did in the 10th grade. Sure his behavior of dropping out of school did not hurt anyone; he does not have any children to support and has never gone back to complete high school he is now 42 years old.
It is simply sad, just like the "victimless" crime of sex in the bushes it is just sad .
Posted by: Charles | Jul 7, 2008 11:57:36 AM
Please stop using the lame, fear based and unproven statements about straight people having sex and NO arrest but gays are arrested.
If this is true and you are witnessing it as much as you say you are, get that camera phone or video camera and record it because you are just spouting LIES to make your weak point better which it does not.
It still reeks as a LIE.
Posted by: Charles | Jul 7, 2008 12:01:18 PM
MARK, you may enjoy being naturally nude and having sex outdoors but according to JOHNNY you are a stupid, risky, sleazy, dangerous, drooling sex fiend. Care to join me in the Meat Rack?
Posted by: John in Manhattan | Jul 7, 2008 12:02:21 PM
John, give me a minute to gather my poppers, nipple clamps, zippered leather hood, cat o'nine tails, harness and sling. I'll be the one in black latex at the top of Belvedere Castle amongst the summer camp groups. Wear a pink feather boa and orange headdress.
Posted by: Mark | Jul 7, 2008 12:10:21 PM
CHARLES,
I witnessed straight people having sex and no police raids (some of the straight boys were built--fierce athletic buns). Right near the Philadelphia Museum of Art. The police rarely bothered them (thank God, I enjoyed seein' them straight boys "plowin'"). Further down the road was the gay area--that's where the police chose to make their raids.
"drooling sex fiend"
JOHNNY, I will stand in front of any mirror next to any gay man my age or 20 years younger--black, white, Latino, or drag queen.
During the 1980s and 90s, the park (Gay Acres) provided a place for me and other gays to go without having to spend money at some boring ass club. No one is asking for support or approval from gay men who don't partake in such activities. All we're saying is if you've never been there, then how do you know what goes on there, or what kinds of gay men frequent (or have frequented) such places.
Having gay men lecture me on sexual morality is like having Tallulah Bankhead tell about the evils of alcohol, or that Hilton gal give speeches on the evils of oral sex.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 7, 2008 12:15:03 PM
Tory councillor Peter Abraham hit out at the anti-gay accusations as 'offensive'. He said: 'How can it be discriminatory to clear land that might stop what is an illegal practice? 'We need to manage the Downs properly. For a long time we have been told that the scrub land needs to be opened up. 'I find it offensive to suggest that by taking this action - which might stop people collecting to carry out what some might describe as illegal acts and certainly offensive behaviour - you are being discriminatory.' The Rainbow Group refused to comment yesterday but said they stood by the comments made in the report."
They refused to comment because Tory councillor Peter Abraham made a BOLD and TRUTHFUL statement that can not be countered, spot on!
Posted by: Charles | Jul 7, 2008 12:17:42 PM
Madam?? Please bitch. That'll be the day.
Posted by: D.R.H. | Jul 7, 2008 12:23:59 PM
i think they have a point after all gays are an endangered species and the gorge is their native habitat... will al gore speak up about this breach of human rights to the pursuit of pleasure and happiness?
Posted by: the queen | Jul 7, 2008 12:26:31 PM
'Ey, live by the cruise, die by the cruise. No lectures here. Not my thing, but to each our own. If you're willing to take the chance of being caught and arrested--fairly or unfairly--more power to you.
Posted by: Chas | Jul 7, 2008 12:54:52 PM
Maybe these people should be focused on the apparently high rate of gay homelessness in their area. One would think that between two adult males at least one of them would have a house or apartment in which they could have sex. These poor victims -- first society denies them of a home, now their right to outdoor sex on public property is being stripped away.
Posted by: paul | Jul 7, 2008 12:55:03 PM
D.R.H.,
No, you didn't call me out my name, Miss Thing.
It is amusing how seriously some of you take this topic. Guys who go to the park do not expect any support from the "greater" gay commnunity if they are arrested, gay-bashed, robbed or murdered (well, you can come to the memorial service, darlin'). The folks against public park sex get so outraged, and y'all start the name-calling, and describing the physical appearances of those of us who've been to the parks--even though you've never seen us. It's downright silly.
"bitch"-- aint that some brave-ass talk on the Internet.
I could talk about yo' mamma's make-up challenges.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 7, 2008 12:56:25 PM