"...restrictions should be based on the specific activity rather than the sex of the participants."
Exactly.
By enacting laws that are obviously targeted at a specific segment of the population, a situation is created where the argument can be made that laws impacting this specific segment of the population need to receive high scrutiny in the Courts.
While we argue that homosexuals are not to be considered a "protected classification" under current anti-discrimination laws, we continue to support actions that actually HELP them achieve that status.
Right. Further, I think that when writing laws such as these the legislatures need to make clear the extent to which such laws are to be enforced. If they intend to have them enforced strictly, they should make it abundantly clear and say so, including justifying surveillance to catch the lawbreakers. If the laws are not intended to be enforced against people who are attempting to be discrete and who are on property they control (through ownership or rental), the laws should say that.
Otherwise, the result will be situations like the Texas case where a law which is generally not applied to people who are attempting to act discretely in their own residence can nonetheless get randomly applied against unlucky people.