www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.va...er_indecent_acts.php

This seems to be a bit gross. Apparently when the uniformed cops turned up the revellers just carried on buggering because they thought the newcomers were fancy dress types keen to join in. I can't imagine that a mixed crowd of men and women would indulge in such group debauchery but then maybe I've led a sheltered life. With behaviour like this apparently common in those of a homosexualist bent it's hardly surprising that disease is rife amongst them.

Levenax wrote:
www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.va...er_indecent_acts.php

This seems to be a bit gross. Apparently when the uniformed cops turned up the revellers just carried on buggering because they thought the newcomers were fancy dress types keen to join in. I can't imagine that a mixed crowd of men and women would indulge in such group debauchery but then maybe I've led a sheltered life. With behaviour like this apparently common in those of a homosexualist bent it's hardly surprising that disease is rife amongst them.

Yes, you've led a sheltered life if you think that orgies are the preserve of the gay community.

Google "swinging" or "swingers". Hey, there might be a club near you.

Have to agree with TLJ that you have led a sheltered life Lev. Sex takes place in and around nightclubs between heterosexual and homosexual couples. I wondered why you thought anyone would contract a disease? Do you not think that people might be having safe sex?
Now, I have to say I have no desire to see anyone having sex so I am quite happy for the licensing board to stop this happening however I do find it hypocritical that there are several lapdancing clubs in Glasgow and they are quite happy to allow them to continue to stay open. Whether or not you approve of lapdancing in itself, they are well known as places where full sex takes place regularly - unless of course, guys are making empty boasts.
I wonder if the Arches was the target in general though. I am not saying that it is true but it does have a reputation for the availability of drugs and the heavy drug use of some of the clubbers (even in relation to other clubs) so perhaps the police have been trying to crack down on the Arches and this was an easier way of proving there was problem.

Meg wrote:
....Sex takes place in and around nightclubs between heterosexual and homosexual couples. I wondered why you thought anyone would contract a disease? Do you not think that people might be having safe sex?

I'm sure it does, but in large groups with multiple partner encounters within a very short time? I think not.
Homosexualists are more promiscuous and indulge in more varied and risky sexual practices than normal people and as a consequence they suffer more from STDs. The various publications from Health Protection Scotland on the matter illustrate this quite well e.g. eighteen times more men than women were diagnosed with syphilis, four times more men than women were diagnosed with HIV and two and a half times more men than women were diagnosed with gonorrhoea (all in 2007).
See www.hps.scot.nhs.uk/bbvsti/wrdetail.aspx?id=38616&wrtype=2 as an example. The safe sex messages had an effect on the behaviour of homosexualists when AIDs was at its height but the recent availability of relatively effective treatments, albeit at great public expense, has blunted the message. The much higher incidence of HIV in queer men indicates that a lot of them have returned to bareback anal copulation.



Meg wrote:
....full sex takes place regularly

As opposed to what? Going off half cocked?

Levenax wrote:

I'm sure it does, but in large groups with multiple partner encounters within a very short time? I think not.

Oh, I think so. Have you done any research on swinging yet as I suggested ? Using the search terms "swinging" and "uk", you'll find some 232k pages on Google uk relating to a practice which some heterosexualists engage in quite frequently.

PS Your sheltered upbringing may also mean that you might not appreciate that some heterosexualists also engage in anal sex.

TLJ wrote:
[quote]Levenax wrote:
....you might not appreciate that some heterosexualists also engage in anal sex.

We could always ask Mr Sheriden about swinging but I still maintain that mixed groups don't indulge in the same large crowd sessions that homosexualists seem to do.
The "back door" has been used for centuries to avoid pregnancy and it's still used as a variation by some straight couples. However it seems not to be a widespread practice since not many women get sexually transmitted disease lesions of the anus or rectum as you'll find if you look through Health Protection Agency figures on the subject.

Levenax wrote:
Meg wrote:
....Sex takes place in and around nightclubs between heterosexual and homosexual couples. I wondered why you thought anyone would contract a disease? Do you not think that people might be having safe sex?

I'm sure it does, but in large groups with multiple partner encounters within a very short time? I think not.

You are wrong if you do not think this happens in large numbers in establishments like lapdancing clubs.

Levenax wrote:

Homosexualists are more promiscuous and indulge in more varied and risky sexual practices than normal people and as a consequence they suffer more from STDs. The various publications from Health Protection Scotland on the matter illustrate this quite well e.g. eighteen times more men than women were diagnosed with syphilis, four times more men than women were diagnosed with HIV and two and a half times more men than women were diagnosed with gonorrhoea (all in 2007).
See www.hps.scot.nhs.uk/bbvsti/wrdetail.aspx?id=38616&wrtype=2 as an example. The safe sex messages had an effect on the behaviour of homosexualists when AIDs was at its height but the recent availability of relatively effective treatments, albeit at great public expense, has blunted the message. The much higher incidence of HIV in queer men indicates that a lot of them have returned to bareback anal copulation.

Why does it mean that these men have to be homosexual? Heterosexual men can be infected by a smaller group of women. This happens regularly through prostitution. My point is not about whether heterosexual or homosexual people are the more or less promiscuous. If promiscuity is something you object to then it shouldn't matter what sex the partner is. My point is that I don't see your evidence to back up that these men are homosexual.



Meg wrote:
....full sex takes place regularly

As opposed to what? Going off half cocked?

Levenax wrote:

The "back door" has been used for centuries to avoid pregnancy and it's still used as a variation by some straight couples. However it seems not to be a widespread practice since not many women get sexually transmitted disease lesions of the anus or rectum as you'll find if you look through Health Protection Agency figures on the subject.

The incidence of an STD present in the anus or rectum won't necessarily be reflective of how widespread a practice anal intercourse is. From what I can find out on the internet, somewhere around 13% to 15% of heterosexual(ist)s engage in it. That's reasonably widespread to me.

Personally speaking, consenting adults can do whatever the hell they want to each other as long as I don't have to watch or participate. If there are those interested in dogging, daisychains, swinging or strip-monopoly they'll know the associated risks with those activities and are responsible for any consequences they encounter.

Keep it behind closed doors, that's all I ask.

I wonder what visitors to our country think when they walk into a nightclub and see sex as described in this article.

And what, pray tell, is a "homosexualist"? Someone who is gay as a hobby? Is that like stamp collecting, only with more spandex and leather chaps?

While you're at it Lev, please define "normal". You're confusing "normal" with "majority". "Normal" in terms of human sexuality means there is a wide spectrum of sexual behaviour, straight and gay. A society which was 100% heterosexual wouldn't be normal. In fact no such society has ever existed. Heterosexuality isn't normal dear. It's just common.

'Dark rooms' as they are called, are a well known feature of some gay venues. Gay venues which are mixed male-female don't have dark rooms. The clue is, if it's a men only night, then sex is likely to be going on. Anyway, in a lot of these places you have to snog the doorman before they'll let you in. (Well I always ask if I can snog the doorman, but perhaps that's just me.) It's hardly likely some poor unsuspecting tourists are going to wander in - anyway, if the tourists are that naive, you could just tell them it was a traditional folk dance.

In the Arches consensual sexual activity went on behind a screened off part of a venue. The venue was only attended by those who knew exactly what was going on there. No one was abused. No one was assaulted. No under age people witnessed anything. And no one, heaven forfend, was corrupted or scandalised. There were no victims.

If you don't want to be disgusted by what goes on in some gay venues, then don't go. For similar reasons I don't go to watch straight porn movies or Old Firm matches.

At a time when there is considerable polemic about violent crime and police numbers and resources, does anyone believe that this action represents an effective use of police time? Are the streets of Glasgow now safer? Perhaps this incident should be noted the next time Glasgow polis request an increase in funding and numbers, they've obviously got officers and resources to spare if they can use them for something like this.

Claiming this is a public health issue is a poor cover for prudish pursed lipped narrow-mindedness. Condoms were available, and based on my own experience of such venues, people who engage in casual anonymous sex have high awareness of safer sex issues. That applies to both straight and gay people.

So yeah Lev, you've led a very sheltered life. You need to get out more. Seriously. Wanna come to the next Gay Pride with me? I'm sure I've got some spandex and leather chaps which will fit you.

Well I too must be a prude I A

I have no problem with any other person’s sexuality and unless it breaks a law or involves force or young people, I really don't care what they do, or how many do this. I do care where it happens and who gets to watch. I don't want to watch, I don’t want to inadvertently stumble across this activity, and I don't want visitors to my country to stumble across this activity. I don't want for instance the young people from abroad who visit my home and go to nightclubs to witness this activity. I know, I have led a sheltered life and would not know a gay nightclub from any other, nor am I familiar with clubs, which will turn a blind eye while any group sex takes place. If I do not have this knowledge, I cannot advise visitors to avoid these venues and put simply why, should we have to.

That I would imagine is the point the police are trying to make.

We are not talking about a parking ticket or a hatsworth here we are talking about an illegal activity.

You cannot give me any guarantee that any under age person did not witness this, the young are famous for using false identities to gain entry to nightclubs, and if many complaints were received it must be that other people did witness this activity.

You cannot give me a guarantee that a drunk young man did not get used or abused during these activities.

My point, do what you want when you want in private.
To use a modern saying, get a room, and not one that is simply screened off and not very well by the sounds of it.

InfrequentAllele wrote:
And what, pray tell, is a "homosexualist"? Someone who is gay as a hobby? Is that like stamp collecting, only with more spandex and leather chaps?

It's a bit a like a philatelist 'cos you get to lick sticky things that have been around a bit.

InfrequentAllele wrote:
While you're at it Lev, please define "normal".

I'm normal.

InfrequentAllele wrote:
'Dark rooms' as they are called, are a well known feature of some gay venues. Gay venues which are mixed male-female don't have dark rooms. The clue is, if it's a men only night, then sex is likely to be going on.

Why's that? Don't lezzas do group sex?

InfrequentAllele wrote:
If you don't want to be disgusted by what goes on in some gay venues, then don't go. For similar reasons I don't go to watch straight porn movies or Old Firm matches.

Quite. But it's still a bit gross when you hear about it. I mean, why would anybody want to bugger somebody they've only just met?

InfrequentAllele wrote:
At a time when there is considerable polemic about violent crime and police numbers and resources, does anyone believe that this action represents an effective use of police time?

No

InfrequentAllele wrote:
Claiming this is a public health issue is a poor cover for prudish pursed lipped narrow-mindedness. Condoms were available, and based on my own experience of such venues, people who engage in casual anonymous sex have high awareness of safer sex issues. That applies to both straight and gay people.

They may have a high awareness but they still behave irresponsibly. The infection figures speak for themselves. Many more homosexualists get syphilis than any other group. In recent stats, MSMs (men who have sex with men) accounted for 71% of all HIV infection in the USA. The plain fact is that sodomy is much more dangerous than normal sex.

TLJ wrote:
The incidence of an STD present in the anus or rectum won't necessarily be reflective of how widespread a practice anal intercourse is. From what I can find out on the internet, somewhere around 13% to 15% of heterosexual(ist)s engage in it. That's reasonably widespread to me.

STD infection rates are a pretty good indicator of sexual preferences. Despite what it says on the interweb I don't think many folk would believe as many as 15% of straight couples engage in sodomy. Anyway why bother when they don't have to do it to avoid pregnancy?

I can just picture it now. Wee Scots granny whose grandson is visiting from the USA with his wife - "Oh here son, there's a new club called ManThrob ye might like tae take Betty tae. Look, it's got a photie o two nice smart men in uniform - they must be respectable people. And they've got big muscles, so they must be into health and fitness. No like thae druggies eh."

So Hank and wife Betty, naive strays from Cowpat Minnesota, accidentally wandered into the dark room of a gay venue in Glasgow where they were traumatised to discover the truth about what Scotsmen wear under their kilts. Hank tore up his application to join the Cowpat Caledonian Society now that he knew what the initiation ceremony entailed. The horror of Mairi's Wedding gave him nightmares for years ... Step we gaily on we go ... over and over in his head. He'd wake up, beads of sweat dotting his forehead. Betty needed months of therapy before she could dance the Gay Gordons again and still suffers a panic attack whenever she's asked if she wants porridge oats.

To this day neither can look at a sporran without a cold shiver running down their spines ... oh the dangly bits ... the dangly bits ...

In the real world, these venues are advertised along the lines of "Burly, For Big Burly Men And Those Who Love Them" or some such. They're generally illustrated by a big poster at the door which shows some of the said Big Burly Men And Those Who Love Them in various states of undress. When Hank and Betty buy their entry tickets, the nature of the venue will be pointed out to them if they haven't already twigged on by noticing all the Big Burly Men And Those Who Love Them who were standing in the queue. There will be doorstaff, whose main role is not to maintain order amongst the Big Burly Men And Those Who Love Them, but to keep out the likes of Hank and Betty. If the doorstaff don't think you're gay or gay-friendly, they won't let you in. (Discrimination!) Inside, any sexual activity will be confined to a secluded or semi-secluded area at the back of the premises.You do not wander into one of these places by accident.

Lydia, I have never been to the club in question, so I can't give you a guarantee of anything. But what I can tell you is that it's almost unheard of for non-consensual sex to go on in that kind of club. After all, it's not like entirely consensual sex is difficult to find there.

What went on in the Arches is less serious than a parking ticket. Illegal parking inconveniences other road users. No one was inconvenienced by what went on in the Arches. I think more time police time and manpower combatting the enforced prostitution of the people trafficking trade is a much greater priority than this. Don't you agree?

Lev - It's so sad that for you sex is such a dangerous and fearful activity, so full of unknowns and risks. What demons must stalk your imagination. Are you are friend of Hank and Betty by any chance?