|
||||||||
|
« Italy Frees Achille Lauro Terrorist |
Blog Home Page
| A Chicago Operation from Top to Bottom »
July 08, 2008 Politically correct sex on the beachIt's amusing to see how politically correct newspapers invariably tiptoe around certain aspects of certain gay lifestyles. Consider, for example, an article in Monday's Boston Herald about how angry officials with the Cape Cod National Seashore are cracking down on public sex on the beach. What kinds of sex might this be? It's toward the bottom of the Herald's story that George Price, superintendent of the Cape Cod National Seashore, says:
Interestingly, Price apparently didn't say how many heterosexual couples were involved -- or whether these couples were engaged in one-on-one sex or in group sex. But that information might be interesting. It's tempting to think that Price added the part about heterosexual misconduct as a concession to politically correctness; or perhaps the Herald's reporter steered the interview in that direction, prodded Price into suggesting that that men and women also were a significant part of the problem. The Boston Herald, for its part, strove to point out,
The paper also noted that the "number of citations for public sex acts more than tripled, from an average of 40 to 132 last year." However, it failed to provide a breakdown of how many of those public sex acts involved heterosexual verses gay couples. It's not hard to read between the lines, however, thanks to some interesting anecdotes that the paper provided toward the midpoint of the story:
Sometimes, newspaper readers cannot even read between the lines when they read about issues involving homosexual sexual misconduct. In Texas not long ago, the Austin American-Statesman ran a brief article about a police raid on a nearby rest stop where a number of arrests were made for "lewd and lascivious" behavior. Curiously, the paper did not elaborate. What was going on? I had to asked my brother-in-law, who lives near the area. "Oh, it's a big gay hangout," he explained. Why did the paper fail to mention this interesting detail? No doubt due to political correctness, the desire not to offend any well-organized gay activists who would be upset over any unflattering portrayal of an unmentionable aspect of some gay lifestyles -- sexual promiscuity in public places, on levels and a scale that simply do not exist among the most promiscuous of heterosexuals, who lack a large and assertive movement enjoying media protection.
|
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|