"That sh!t is whack!"
Posted on 08/29/2007 8:11:54 PM PDT by TornadoAlley3
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - A foot-tapping ritual was a common thread in many of the 41 arrests reported during a four-month airport bathroom sting that snared Sen. Larry Craig. An undercover officer would take a seat in a stall. Soon another man would sit in the stall next door and start tapping his foot, perhaps moving it closer to the officer's. The officer would move his foot up and down slowly. The suspect might then extend his hand under the divider between the stalls, sometimes repeatedly. That would be enough to get the man busted.
Airport police reports obtained by The Associated Press gave strikingly similar accounts of the events that led to the 41 arrests officers made for alleged lewd conduct in public restrooms in the main terminal of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport during the May-August sting.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
cicadis?
I am weird in that I would not use a public stall short of a life and death situation. This was life and death when I got there. OK, so what do I do. Down here on the main floor, or clench and head up to the class floor and find a clean stall. The big question was could I make it to the upstairs what I assumed were less used cleaner stalls.
So off I went to the cleaner (I rationalized) stall. Bad choice I get there rush in sit down and OMG... Hot wings and very cheap nasty college beer in large quantities have consequences. I was so relieved until.... I noticed the +/-5 inch diameter holes on both sides of the stall. Graffiti around the holes suggesting... well lets call it Craig (or is it Craig’s List) like behavior. Thank GOD!!! the place was empty except for me.
I got the hell out of there quickly. After telling some friends about it I was later told these kind of things were all over campus. I was told it was mostly poli sci, journalism and music students that were into the “glory hole” restrooms. Go figure.
I know it takes a lot of faith to believe in the good of people, but I am a mother who has two boys. After they got to the point that I could not take them into the women's restroom anymore, I had to hang out, my ear pressed to the door listening for anything that I thought was out of order. I had pilots, attorneys, CPAs, firemen, middle managers, any number of men come out of the restrooms reporting that my boys washed up after peeing and made menshes of themselves. There are a lot of good people out there. (But I have had to hang out, loitering around a lot of men's restrooms, looking like a pervert myself.) Now, I have two teenage sons who would kill anyone who tried to mess with a kid in a public bathroom.
Born-again Christians are always armed with gospel tracts and some of the more missionary-minded make a point to place a tract in every stall of every public restroom they visit.
Always read the photocopies of police reports that are posted at thesmokinggun.com.
The MSM always leaves out details that are in the actual police report.
A caller on talk radio yesterday pointed out: How would the senator use a wide stance with his pants down around his ankles?
And now that I know I have to ask why did I ask? Is there no limit to how disgusting these folks can be? Alternative life style? Hell, it’s simply meaningless promiscuous gratification for brazen hedonistic onanists. Craig needs to resign.
This is bogus. Youcan’t arrest and convict someone for tapping his foot. Even if it is a message, so what. That’s protected free speech. Even if he is cruising, the other can say no. So, where is the crime, here?
Reminds me of an old joke:
A priest sees a drunk stumble into the confessional. The priest goes into his side and waits. About ten minutes pass but the Priest waits to allow the drunk time to collect his thoughts. Finally the Priest clears his throat and knocks on the wall of the confessional booth.
The drunk responds: I can't help you buddy, there is no toilet paper in this stall either.
re: Cornell
When I was at Harvard there was a big flap around 1990 about men’s rooms at the campus Science Center and also a couple of the libraries being used for gay “cruising” and sex — of course most of the controversy was about police tactics (both campus and City of Cambridge) in making at least a dozen arrests. Then I think for some years they kept the doors removed from those bathroom stalls (though I’m not sure because I never went near any of those bathrooms again, but that was what I heard). The biggest flap was about whether Cambridge police were “sensitive” enough — especially since they used medical/latex gloves to process the perps and it became a cause celebre among the gay/lesbian/multisexual “community” that the mean, nasty Cambridge police weren’t very “sensitive” to wear the gloves while fingerprinting etc. the perps. I actually never heard or saw a thing about it at all outside of the articles in the campus paper, but it sure did make some of the local activists upset..... [not the random stranger sex, mind you, just the fact that the police were actually making “insensitive” arrests]
I’m happy to say I’ve never been directly aware of any sexual activity in any public bathroom..... UGH. Have only read the occasional article like the one below, but most of the time whatever’s happening is either ignored by police, unknown to police, and/or simply kept quiet by the practitioners. But how would you like to have your campus bathrooms taken over as a gay sex bathhouse:
[this was from 1990]:
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=242035
Justified, But Insensitive
SCIENCE CENTER ARRESTS:
Published On Thursday, February 08, 1990 12:00 AM
THE arrests of 12 men on charges of “open and gross lewdness” in the Science Center bathroom over the past several weeks has provoked a storm of protests from campus gay activists. They complain that the police were insensitive in the handling of the arrested men and that the recent crackdown on sexual activity in the Science Center is necessarily a symptom of hatred of gays.
On the first count, they are right. On the second count, the evidence is far less conclusive.
The Harvard Law School Committee on Gay and Lesbian Legal Issues charged last week that Harvard and Cambridge police had harassed the arrested men, and demanded that the University administration require Harvard police to undergo sensitivity training in gay and lesbian issues.
In the case of the Cambridge police, they have a legitimate complaint: Cambridge officers insisted on wearing latex gloves when they fingerprinted the arrested men, a practice that Cambridge police Capt. William R. Burke called “a precaution...to prevent the spread of AIDS.”
This practice must end. Although Burke said that the use of rubber gloves is not limited to handling of gay detainees, the Cambridge police evidently assumed that AIDS is spread through casual contact, such as holding down a person’s hand on an ink pad. It isn’t.
The use of gloves in booking the men was less a public health measure than a way for police officers to demonstrate their contempt for the arrested men.
Morris Ratner, chair of the Law School committee, also charged that Harvard police verbally harassed the arrested men. If they did, it was also unacceptable. Harvard should institute sensitivity training on sexual orientation for its police force. Powerful societal actors have a responsibility to use their resources to eliminate bigotry.
THE committee’s larger complaint is not about the treatment of the men in custody, but the Harvard police’s concerted policy of arresting men found engaged in sexual activity in the bathroom.
In a letter to The Crimson, Rattner and Jarret T. Barrios ‘90, co-chair of the Harvard-Radcliffe Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Student Association (BGLSA) charged that the crackdown on bathroom sex was motivated solely by “the perhaps unconscious manifestation of a deep-seated ignorance and fear of gay people and gay sex.”
While there is likely some truth to the assertion, it is overly simplistic to attribute the arrests solely to pervasive homophobia. It seems just as likely that the motivation for the crackdown stems from a long history of using the Science Center bathroom as a “tearoom” for anonymous sex between gay men. These men have reportedly repeatedly made unwanted sexual overtures towards Harvard students and staff. It doesn’t matter whether the propositions were heterosexual or homosexual—the University has a responsibility to keep such activity out of its restrooms.
That means eliminating public sex from the Science Center. The BGLSA and the Law School committee argue that the arrests by plainclothes officers were unnecessary, and that posting a uniformed guard or a sign that says “No Sex” would suffice...... [YEAH, RIGHT].....
[article continues at link]
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=242035
is that what your experience tells you??
“This past weekend I had to tell my son he couldn’t go to the movies with his 13 year old sister.”
And I just had to tell my 14 yr. old son not to tap his foot to music or fidget while sitting on the pot.
If someone slid the hand or foot under my stall, I’d stomp the crap out of them.
I understand in the UK they call it cottaging.
HATE CRIME!!!! heh
No, and I don't know who wrote it, but it's all over the net by now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.