Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
DIRTY DEEDS

Gay Activist Larry Brinkin Arrest On Child-Porn Charges

SF Weekly is reporting that LGBT activist Larry Brinkin has been charged with possessing child pornography. Brinkin, 66, was arrested and booked into San Francisco County Jail on Friday, but posted bail and was released on Saturday, police said.

Until he retired in 2010,. Brinkin worked for San Francisco’s Human Rights Commission for 22 years, championing equality for the LGBT community. He was a beloved local figure—the city’s Board of Supervisors even declared the first week of February “Larry Brinkin Week.”

“It’s almost incredulous, there’s no way I could believe such a thing,” Theresa Sparks, the commission’s current executive director, told the Weekly. “He’s always been one of my heroes, and he’s the epitome of human rights activist. This is man who coined phrases we use in our daily language. I support Larry 100 percent, hopefully it will all come out in the investigation.”

San Francisco police were alerted to the situation by the LAPD, which had received from AOL an email exchange between a L.A.  member and an email address registered to Brinkin. The materials the police uncovered gave even our jaded ass pause:

The warrant claims these e-mails contained images of children as young as perhaps a year old being sodomized by and performing oral sex on adult men. Zack3737@aol.com—whom the police allege is Brinkin—provided graphic commentary on the photos of interracial adult-child sex. Comments included “I loved especially the nigger 2 year old getting nailed. Hope you’ll continue so I can see what the little blond bitch is going to get. White Power! White Supremacy! White Dick Rules!”

The AOL e-mail account was also linked to Yahoo! Groups centering around discussions of child porn, according to the search warrant. Investigators say they additionally found e-mails sent from Brinkin’s now-defunct city e-mail account to zack3737@aol.com.

We really want to believe this is the work of right-wing takedown artists, but it doesn’t look good.

Photo: SFPD

By:           Dan Avery
On:           Jun 27, 2012
Tagged: , , ,
  • 79 Comments
    • moot magazine
      moot magazine

      Great, this idiot is going to do WONDERS for the gay community. Now, it will give credence to the idiots who believe gay men are all pedophiles. Thanks a lot ass hole.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 6:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      The problem with the American gay community is that it adheres to anyone – and I mean anyone – who is remotely gay-friendly in appearance. There is no analysis, no closer examination. We have become a very superficial community that wants shout-outs but no accountability. It’s backfiring on us big time.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 7:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • w.e.
      w.e.

      Scum.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 7:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      This is an example of a man who has his dark side exposed. Before all the moralising begins it would be good to learn from this spectacular case. Not that what happened was not immoral, of course it is, and right that it should be punished too.
      What we see here is not a man who has been lying or using his respectable side as a cover, rather it is the dark aspect of his personality, what Carl Jung called the Shadow which is working here. Everyone has a shadow aspect and rather than denying it, the important thing is to master it, work with it daily so it doesnt undo you like it did this guy. Consciously this guy is good fighting for human rights etc sincerely and with all his energy, unconsciously however dark desires run unchecked, and because he cannot handle them and give no space for things that are vitally important, they build up and spill over into consciousness in this horrid twisted way.

      All human beings contain both Heaven and Hell. Both are projections of psychic contents within. During WWII German guards in concentration camps killed jews and other deviants on an industrial scale only to come home and be quite normal fathers and husbands. Both realities coexisted. We imagine that our psyche is unified, conscious and a whole. In reality there is a large part of the iceberg we do not see, because it is submerged in unconsciousness. At the same time the psyche has a propensity to split so things that are incompatible can exist simultaneously.
      Normally we are only aware of the ego, which is the focal point of consciousness. The ego likes to imagine it runs the show and that it is the whole psyche. As this example shows other forces are at work too. Denying them is asking for trouble. Not everyone has the same dark desires. Not everyone wants to look at children being fucked. I thank my maker I do not feel like that. Im more a danger to myself

      Jun 27, 2012 at 8:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marcos Bosch
      Marcos Bosch

      Someone should point out that most early gay rights activists campaigned to repeal age of consent laws regarding sex. Even Michel Foucault and his allies wrote long essays advocating legalization of sex between children and adults. And how often do we see these themes in gay literature? The only thing that shocks me here, honestly, is the sort of feigned shock from all of the “gay” blogs. Harry Hay marching with NAMBLA, anyone?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 8:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AshNYC
      AshNYC

      Why are people assuming that the accusations will be proven true?……innocent until proven guilty….anyone?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 8:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @AshNYC: Well for starters the dumb ass implicated himself using his City, as in ‘work’ email address. Curious you would defend someone whom received pictures of a two year old male black child being sodomized and reply back accordingly. Personally I find is unconscionable and vile, anyone?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 8:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @moot magazine: Those right wing assholes would think what they want regardless, so it does not really matter.

      @Marcos Bosch: You mean the laws that said if a 16 year old girl slept with a 21 year old guy it was perfectly alright, but if a 16 year old boy slept with his 18 year old boyfriend (partner) that it was illegal and statutory rape? Those laws? Yeah, I can not see any reason what-so-ever to work to repeal those.

      There is a HUGE difference between that and raping a 2 year old child. HUGE difference. Get over yourself.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 9:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Spike: You are assuming that he sent the e-mails. E-mails are VERY easily hacked. They are so easy to hack that most hackers do not bother hacking bank accounts or any other sort of account and just hack e-mails to learn all kinds of information (including bank account information).

      In fact, e-mail in and of itself does not normally stand up very well in court. Now, if they would have found pictures on his home machine (which they most likely seized) then it would have lent credence.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 9:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville
      The Real Mike in Asheville

      CALM THE FUCK DOWN, BOYS!

      Just to start, I have ZERO tolerance for child abuse and child porn — ZERO, fry ‘em!

      BUT —

      Through comments posted on another site, someone posted that you can Google “zack3737@aol.com letter to pedophile” and find the alleged Brinkin posting. HOWEVER, the so-called “Letter” clearly states that it is a work of fiction, none of the characters are real, none of the activities took place — IT WAS FANTASY FICTION.

      To me, the letter was disturbing and disgusting — absolutely to appeal to me and nothing I would be interested in. But, as a work of fiction, guys/gals getting off over reading about a fictional situation, that is their business, not mine. (I can’t imagine that my personal fantasies would not be found to be disturbing to others too).

      And, as so many porn/sex websites now include cartoon and avatar porn, and the amazing quality of photoshopped works show, like fiction, images can and are created as pieces of fiction.

      The SCOTUS has recently ruled on anti-child porn laws that the parts of the laws pertaining to fictional written works and fictionalized images are unconstitutional bans prohibited by the First Amendment. If it is merely fantasy, no matter how disgusting that fantasy is, it is just fantasy and constitutionally protected.

      *******

      I hope that that is the case — a guy (Brinkin) whose taste in fantasy is extreme, who collects sexually explicit but man/computer generated images. And, I don’t mind one bit, if this is the case, that AOL, the LAPD and the SFPD investigated what is what.

      And should the porn images be real, lock him up next to Sandusky for all eternity.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Clockwork
      Clockwork

      What are you afraid of moderator? The truth?

      >We really want to believe this is the work of right-wing takedown artists, but it doesn’t look good.

      Instead, why don’t you worry about the children?
      God help the children in those photographs.

      Looks like we have a pedophile and a racist, not exactly a ticket to heaven.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @The Real Mike in Asheville: I knew it was only a matter of time before you warped queens would defend him in the form of veiled justification. Does anyone on this blog have any morals? This is nearly as bad as defending nondisclosure of HIV status to sex partners.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Some Random Guy
      Some Random Guy

      @Hello: Considering the fictional nature of so many of your comments, and your inability to keep track of your own fictional stories, and the fact you didn’t bother to actually read THAT article or the comments there either, you might want to reconsider.

      Try reading The Real Mike’s comment again… verrrrry sloooooowly… take your time, and buy a dictionary first.

      After that, you can appoint yourself to the Supreme Court!

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Some Random Guy:

      “To me, the letter was disturbing and disgusting — absolutely to appeal to me and nothing I would be interested in. ”

      Suggests it doesn’t appeal to them personally.

      “But, as a work of fiction, guys/gals getting off over reading about a fictional situation, that is their business, not mine.”

      This suggests that fantasizing about abusing children is OK and none of their business.

      “(I can’t imagine that my personal fantasies would not be found to be disturbing to others too).”

      This suggests their own fantasies are equally as depraved and that because they are they don’t judge the fantasizing of child abuse.

      You take the cake Random.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @Daez: Gotcha, you’re defending the pedophile white supremacist because he is gay. BTW, did you read the article, the emails that you are defending as having been ‘hacked’ are from his job with the City of SF prior to retiring 2010, right, someone hacked his email, 2+ years ago, he never noticed and now it’s coming out, or maybe they hacked his inactive work email account, so that AOL would report him to the LAPD, oops, AOL, that isn’t even connected to his City email. I guess just every one of his email accounts were hacked, because he is gay, right, not because he is a pedophile white supremacist piece of human waste, but do continue to defend him of it makes you feel better.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Spike: I am defending him because until he is PROVEN guilty he is innocent. That is the way that this country works. I would defend him until he was proven guilty no matter what his stances and views. Even if he was homophobic and bigoted.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ronsfo
      ronsfo

      @Marcos Bosch: Regarding Harry Hay marching with N.A.M.B.L.A., it was my recollection that Harry Hay felt that NAMBLA had the right to free speech, therefore allowed to march in the a Pride parade, that was totally taken out of context, telegraphed around the Harry Hay supported and endorsed NAMBLA, which was not the case at all.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ernst
      Ernst

      @Daez: “That is the way that this country works.”

      Actually, that’s the way the criminal courts work. The public is allowed to think whatever it wants.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Clockwork
      Clockwork

      @Ernst:
      Actually, that’s the way the criminal courts work. The public is allowed to think whatever it wants.

      Indeed…

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Ernst: No, there has always been a long standing belief amongst most rational people that the way the criminal court system works is the way the public works as well. To say that the public is allowed to think whatever it wants while the criminal justice system must believe someone is innocent until they are proven guilty totally undermines the entire criminal justice system.

      With your way of thinking, why do we need a criminal justice system at all, lets let the media tell us who is guilty and who is innocent, shall we!?!

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert

      So we are to believe that a Jewish man would end an email with ‘White Power’?

      Or that a gay man would write admiring reviews of loli porn?

      Somehow, this does not entirely add up. I am stowing my torch and pitchfork until AFTER the trial.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Some Random Guy
      Some Random Guy

      @Hello: “the Real Mike: ‘(I can’t imagine that my personal fantasies would not be found to be disturbing to others too).’”

      “This suggests their own fantasies are equally as depraved…” Uh, no. “Equally?” Where is the “equally” stated or implied? Only in your own mind.

      Yes, we understand you want a medal and a pat on the back from the homophobic straights, for your hatred of certain things you imagine going on in gay life that You Just Can’t Stand. (Which sometimes aren’t actually happening in real life at all, as perhaps in this case.)

      But guess what? – homophobic straights would consider YOUR personal fantasies to be disturbing too, just because you’re gay. Not necessarily “equally” as disturbing as [fill in whatever imaginary queen or f** you consider beneath you], but disturbing.

      That’s what Real Mike, and the Supreme Court were saying. As a writer of fiction, you should appreciate that. :)

      And again, as Real Mike said – if it’s NOT fiction, and if these things actually happened in real life, THAT’S DIFFERENT AND NOBODY IS DEFENDING THAT.

      Damn – do you EVER actually read these things?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ernst
      Ernst

      @Daez: ???? What? The courts are one thing, the public is another. I (or the public at large) can think someone is guilty even after he’s found innocent in the courts. Casey Anthony ring a bell? OJ Simpson? Even Dan White was found not guilty of murder, and I think most people in here would say he was damn guilty.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Some Random Guy: I don’t give a shit what the supreme court or real mike says. Fiction or not it’s fucked up and you disgust me for defending it and nondisclosure.

      I don’t imagine anything …all I need to do is read Queerty to get a sense of what gays think like.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville
      The Real Mike in Asheville

      @Hello: FU bigot! Nice try IGNORING what I wrote and applying your extremely warped skewed view.

      I wrote: “To me, the letter was disturbing and disgusting — absolutely to appeal to me and nothing I would be interested in. ” That is MY opinion, no one else’s and I did not ascribe that anyone else should or should not agree. It “suggests” only that I do not participate in written nor images of fictional account that include children.

      I wrote: “But, as a work of fiction, guys/gals getting off over reading about a fictional situation, that is their business, not mine.” Again, that is MY opinion, like “sticks and stones hurt my bones but words will never hurt me” fictional words do not harm me nor others. It “suggests” only that what works of fiction others read is their business, and government should keep their nose out of citizen’s private and protected life.

      I wrote: “(I can’t imagine that my personal fantasies would not be found to be disturbing to others too).” It “suggests” only that I have fantasies that include spanking, some B&D, some leather and some watersports (I discribe my level of enthusiasm as wide, varied and softball) but there are some, like you Hello, who are so prudish to even consenting adult play. My fantasy play happens that it does not include any fantasy of illegal actions involving force nor children.

      ******

      Do you whine Hello at the TV or movies that show fictionalized accounts of murder and rape? Every night there are dozens of programs depicting illegal conduct as a matter of fictionalized programs/movies.

      So fuck off bigot bitch.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Ernst: You have no idea why the jury reached the verdict that they did. You have no idea what really happened in any of those cases. You can rush to judgement all that you want, but that is why we have a legal system.

      I am guessing you are reading what QT wrote and nothing else and rushing to condemn this man. There is a problem there. Journalists are not judges, and the public is not the jury. Why not leave the findings of guilt and innocence to the system established to reach such findings?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ernst
      Ernst

      @Daez: So people are not allowed to form their own opinions? Good luck convincing people of that.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @The Real Mike in Asheville: You need to be careful that you don’t imply that personal fantasies about rape and murder and child abuse are okay and I suggest if you do then you should get to a psychiatrist asap.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @The Real Mike in Asheville:

      “Do you whine Hello at the TV or movies that show fictionalized accounts of murder and rape? Every night there are dozens of programs depicting illegal conduct as a matter of fictionalized programs/movies.”

      This implies you think there should be shows about child abuse since you think that shows about murder and rape are the same thing.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Ernst: People can form their own opinions. However, most normally wait to see the facts and decided for themselves. The examples that you mentioned were so heavily televised that it was like the people were right there in the court room for themselves.

      However, this is one “article” on a “news” site that is not exactly known for its esteemed journalism, and you are wanting to convict the guy based on four paragraphs of what you read.

      @Hello: Oh honey, you do not read QT to get a sense of what gay men think and feel like, you read it because you are closet case that has preconceived notions of what you think gay men think and feel like and you want to go out of your way to “prove” yourself right.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Daez: If you say so.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Some Random Guy
      Some Random Guy

      @Hello: Again, your very active imagination. Explaining the many drawbacks of criminalizing nondisclosure, and explaining how it leads to more infection, is not the same thing as “defending nondisclosure.”

      Explaining the difference between FICTION and REALITY is not the same thing as “defending” the disgusting fiction! (Again, if fiction is what it is.)

      Btw, the Supreme Court doesn’t give a s*** what you think either.

      Maybe you can ask your imaginary boyfriend to explain all this to you?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Daez: You are right…I want to “prove” I am right. Unfortunately I am. :(

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Some Random Guy: I am sorry you can’t find a boyfriend that will be faithful to you. It must make you bitter. Keep looking and change your attitude and maybe you will.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      Why does every comment section look like a shit show? Let’s boil this down:

      1. If the accusations prove to be true and if there are pictures and videos of children being raped, he deserves to be locked up for a long time, end of story.
      2. If the accusations prove to be true and if they are merely “drawings” and “fiction”, he is protected by law, but he is still a sick fucking person. Law may dictate that fiction is protected, but getting turned on by the idea of raping a baby is so horrific that I can’t even fathom how anyone could defend him.
      3. Just because someone he is gay does not mean this is some set-up by political enemies. Gay people can be awful, just like everyone else. The evidence looks pretty damning, so while we shouldn’t automatically assume he is guilty, we also shouldn’t assume this is a trap.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Hello: Far be it for me to tell you any difference. I mean, you know what you know and you know what you think. When you chose to step out of your fantasy and into reality maybe you will find yourself and be able to come out and be a happy, well functioning human being, but then again that might never happen.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Mark: Best comment yet.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Hello: Hey try teading what wrote. Dont hate on a stick because it has two ends. Everyone has dark thoughts, even you. Pushing them away or pretending they are not there can get you in trouble later, when your barriers break and the nastiness creeps through.

      Fantasy is fantasy and problems only arise when people see a need to act on their fantasies in a way that harms other people, like child porn.

      The cleaner you make yourself the more dirty and warped your unconscious gets, the more selfless you arethe more selfish the unconscious etc. Living a one-sided life is never good. Look at the cristian right. They claim to live in heaven on earth and think of themselves as saints and full of love. Yet they choose to hurt the relatives of dead soldiers as a means to fight gays etc etc anti gay preachers hire young rent boys to”carry their bags” and become the predators they accuse others of being, instead of living out their gay life in a less lewd way.

      The real danger comes when only the others are evil. In fact the values you attribute to everyone here are merely YOUR OWN THOUGHTS PROJECTED ON OTHERS. You dont know anyone here. These are your contents…

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Clockwork
      Clockwork

      Why do you think an impartial jury is selected?

      Because many people have formed opinions on guilt or innocence; and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

      Have you ever heard of a judge condemning a potential juror for stating they believe someone is guilty?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Some Random Guy
      Some Random Guy

      @Hello: Yes, Mark’s comment is great, but it’s pretty much what The Real Mike said too. Have your meds kicked in suddenly?

      I rarely watch TV cop & crime shows, just not my thing. But I’ll bet anything there HAVE been depictions of child abuse on mainstream, network TV crime shows. Probably since the ’80s, and maybe the ’70s. So was that also bad, and punishable, in your world?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @Daez: Actually, the whole innocent until proven guilty, only applies to the jury. I, as a member of the general pubic, who is not and will not be on the jury if this case ever goes to court, can come to whatever conclusion I wish, and my conclusion, unlike yours, is not to defend, condone or celebrate gay white supremacist pedophiles. Just curious, why is it that pictures the portray sexual activity between and adult and two year old boy, not bother you?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hello
      Hello

      @Martin: I do know one thing and that is because we (gays) are judged we defend the behavior of others to the death. We don’t want our behavior judged so we won’t judge others behavior no matter how repugnant.

      In the end you end up with convoluted discussions and justification. It’s always “yes but….have you looked at it from their perspective?” That’s what people in this thread are doing.

      I admire Marks comment because he cuts right through the waffling bull…

      We are proud to be liberal and basically define it as never judging and everything is OK. This in turn allows one thing to lead to another until we have no morals and actually defend child abuse in veiled form.

      If people were thinking right there would be no discussion about the rights of child abuse fantasies.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • w.e.
      w.e.

      Actually, he is lower than scum for using the cloak of civil rights for his horrible dealings. God only knows what other atrocities he has committed, although I’m sure this will now be investigated. And please don’t drag any deceased gay rights pioneers into this. They are dead, along with any misguided notions of “healthy” relations with underage children. We now know that this practice is extremely harmful to young people who are not of sufficient age or maturity to give consent.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Fairley
      Fairley

      This is bogus. I am not generally one for consipiracy theories, but people do conspire, and trumped-up charges are created. I have known Larry Brinkin since I was 10 years old. He comes from a background of civil rights activism–since his very young days. He is of Jewish descent. There is no way that he would use this language. I believe whoever hacked into his account is a homophobic fanatic, with aims to divided the gay community and the black/gay community/ communities. Serioulsy LGBT folks–let’s wait until we know more; This is NOT the language of Larry. THis is disgusting and heinous, but I am certain that it is NOT the work of our beloved ally and lifelong activist.

      With Solidarity and Love and indignation for victims of such aggregious crimes.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 12:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Selrah
      Selrah

      @Hello:

      Great comment, and done without personally attacking anyone.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 1:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville
      The Real Mike in Asheville

      @Hello: There are shows all the time that feature children as the victims of rape and murder, dipshit — Law & Order Special Victims’ Unit, plus most other law/order type shows regularly offer programs involving children — and in most all shows, the bad guys get caught and, properly, sent to prison where they would belong if they were real activities instead of TV programs.

      And yes, fucktard, I would rather have guys/gals getting off to fictional accounts and fictional images than having those pedophiles abuse any child — too bad all those freaky Catholic priests didn’t simply read a bad porno book than molest and rape children. Bitch.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Guys, don’t jump to conclusions until all the facts are in. Reports in San Francisco newspapers (this came out there a few days ago) indicate that he was arrested and that the police seized a couple of laptops and some flash drives. Whatever is on those has not been released to the public.

      Also, keep in mind that it is possible that someone broke into his AOL account and sent the offending emails, which will be a more plausible explanation if nothing incriminating is found on his computers or flash drives. AOL probably has records of IP addresses, or phone numbers if a dial-up connection was used, Those may not identify him – the offending material could have been sent using a free WiFi service at a coffee shop, where user sessions are not logged due to using inexpensive consumer-grade WiFi routers. Other possibilities include someone breaking into his personal WiFi router (if he has one) and also finding his email password, or perhaps there was some malware on one of his computers. Also, if he used a web-based interface to his email, browser security flaws could contribute to others getting access to his AOL email account.

      We won’t know for some time. The police aren’t going to release very much about the case if only to avoid warning the guilty parties (whether him or others) as to what is being looked at.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stuart
      Stuart

      Innocent till proven guilty, but this still taints his reputation and the work he has done. If he is guilty denounce him and move on, if he’s innocent apologize and move on.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 1:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marcos Bosch
      Marcos Bosch

      @Daez:
      Actually, Harry Hay did support NAMBLA — quote: “If the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world.”

      And regarding age of consent laws, note that it’s simply the case that the intellectual mainstream of the gay movement at least until the early 80s did support a total “liberation” ideology regarding sex that did include the right of adults to have sex with children. Read “The Danger of Child Sexuality” by Foucault or various writings by Gayle Rubin. This is a part of the history of gay activism that should be acknowledged, not denied or hidden, for the sake of socio-historical understanding as well as political honesty.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Some Random Guy
      Some Random Guy

      @Hello: You seem to be reading, or hallucinating, a comment thread that does not exist in reality.

      Not one person here has been “defending” child abuse. No one is even “defending” fictional depictions of child abuse, by merely pointing out that they happen all the time legally on TV crime shows.

      A few are familiar with the accused in real life, don’t believe he’s guilty, and suspect he was framed by homophobes.

      So in your mind, gay men almost all have bad morals because we don’t immediately light the torches and join the lynch mob. Ooooooh.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 3:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      Hmmm I think we should wait until the details come out before we crucify the guy. His email could be hacked, there could be any number of reasons these vile images were linked back to him.

      Innocent until proven guilty.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 3:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kim
      Kim

      @Daez: So do you defend people who are arrested for anti gay murders? I’ll check for your name to see if you defend them.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 4:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @Kim: I’m willing to believe that everyone is innocent until proven guilty unless some real evidence comes to light.

      There is no smoking gun, no video tape and no DNA in this case. All there is a few e-mails that may or may not have been written by the defendant. Convicting him is a little short sighted at this point.

      E-mail is VERY easily hacked. Most hackers go directly after e-mail. Most companies that offer free e-mail services do not bother to pay for the right amount of protection when it comes to their domains.

      Apparently, this is so prominent at AOL that they even created a help page for it…
      http://help.aol.com/help/microsites/microsite.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=15722

      Jun 27, 2012 at 4:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bee
      Bee

      @Martin: Took the words right from mouth!

      Jun 27, 2012 at 4:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • LaTeesha
      LaTeesha

      Straight person logic: “A gay person does something bad, then all gay people are bad. A straight person does something bad, then that behavior only reflects upon the individual, not the entire heterosexual population.”

      Jun 27, 2012 at 5:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • victor
      victor

      @Fairley:

      Are you saying that because someone is Jewish that he can’t be a white supremacist? LOL! That’s ridiculous. Racists can be of any religion.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 7:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hey now
      Hey now

      @LaTeesha, you couldn’t have said it any better! Bravo!

      @Marcos Bosch, I am sure they were more heterosexuals during the sexual revolution who believed in the idea of adults having sex with kids. As a matter of fact, most pedophiles are indeed straight. Deal with it.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 9:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nat
      Nat

      @ronsfo:

      Come on, let’s not whitewash the past. Hay supported NAMBLA’s ideals in addition to its free speech rights. And it shouldn’t have taken 5 minutes – let alone years – for gay rights organizations to reject it and its adherents.

      What we can take comfort in was that there was as much visceral disgust amongst rank-and-file gays over its presence as there was in greater American society. But the fact that it had any involvement whatsoever is a lesson to avoid having the message being hijacked by extremists.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 9:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • K
      K

      After reading this article and the comments, I’m really, really shocked… someone’s still using AOL?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 9:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No. 5 · Marcos Bosch wrote, “The only thing that shocks me here, honestly, is the sort of feigned shock from all of the “gay” blogs. Harry Hay marching with NAMBLA, anyone?”

      If you check his Wikipedia entry, you’ll find the following two statements about Hay:

      “Having witnessed the move of Mattachine away from its founding Marxist activist principles and having seen the gay community marginalize drag queens and leather enthusiasts through the first decade of the post-Stonewall gay movement, Hay opposed what he believed were efforts to move other groups to the margins as the gay rights movement progressed.”

      and

      “In 1986 Hay was confronted by police when he attempted to march in the Los Angeles pride parade, from which NAMBLA had been banned, with a sign reading “NAMBLA walks with me.”[14][note 5] Hay refused to participate in the official 1994 parade in New York City commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Stonewall riots because of its exclusionary policies.”

      Harry Hay had a strong objection to anything he thought was “exclusionary”, and his sign about NAMBLA was purely symbolic – NAMBLA was not allowed in that parade. It seems Hay was not a member of NAMBLA.

      Also NAMBLA (according to its Wikipedia entry) was founded in 1978 and the first opposition to it by gay rights organizations was in 1979. That’s roughly the time it would take for people to figure out what NAMBLA was up to given the limited resources that gay rights organizations have.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Anna
      Anna

      @Daez: Did you defend the Catholic priests who were accused, before many of them were convicted? Or did you bash them anyway simply because they were Catholic priests?

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Patrick Mulcahey
      Patrick Mulcahey

      Anyone who knows Larry knows the accusations cannot possibly be true. Wi-fi can be hacked, credit-card numbers pirated, email addresses spoofed — Queerty’s report says the charge is “possessing child pornography,” but as yet there’s no proof the images are even on Larry’s computer, and in fact he has NOT been charged, pending examination of two home laptops and a desktop. (And can Larry really be the sole user of three computers?)

      If Larry had been better at self-promotion during all the years he spent working for EVERYONE’s rights, this appalling rush to judgment would not be happening. And commenters here would be ashamed at the conclusions you’ve jumped to and how you’ve abandoned judgment and common sense for the simpleminded satisfaction of torches and pitchforks.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nat
      Nat

      @B:

      You’ve neglected to include the most relevant statement that Hay made in regards to NAMBLA’s activities and his own personal views: “[I]f the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world.”

      That’s an unambiguous endorsement of pederasty. Not only that, it propagates the notion that all adolescent males are ‘guided’ into their sexuality by older, predatory men.

      I don’t support relegating Hay or Ginsberg to the ash-heap of history (though Thorstad can take a long walk off a short pier). But there was often an inherent ugliness to many of their positions, and it does well to remember that they were far, far away from being saints.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nat
      Nat

      @Patrick Mulcahey:

      “Anyone who knows Larry knows the accusations cannot possibly be true.”

      Variations of this have been said about every sort of human predator. The staggering number of CSA cases that involve a family member are proof positive that it is often impossible to fully know what someone is capable of until they do it.

      Jun 27, 2012 at 11:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 61 · Nat wrote, “@B: You’ve neglected to include the most relevant statement that Hay made in regards to NAMBLA’s activities and his own personal views: “[I]f the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world.” That’s an unambiguous endorsement of pederasty. Not only that, it propagates the notion that all adolescent males are ‘guided’ into their sexuality by older, predatory men.”

      I didn’t find that, and you provided no citation, nor even a date. He might have simply mean that adolescent males needed what today would be called ‘role models”, with no sexual connotation intended. In the past, what the general public believed about gays and lesbians was a “Frankenstein” fantasy that was only dispelled when they found out that people they knew were gay and that they were as normal as everyone else. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Briggs_Initiative for an example of how public opinion shifted as a result of people finding out the truth.

      Jun 28, 2012 at 1:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 62 · Nat wrote, “@Patrick Mulcahey: “Anyone who knows Larry knows the accusations cannot possibly be true.” Variations of this have been said about every sort of human predator.”

      Variations of this have also been said about people who were in fact innocent. At this point, the smart thing to say is that we don’t know if the charges are valid or not.

      BTW, according to http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=67833 (a San Francisco, gay-oriented weekly), ‘Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office, said Tuesday that prosecutors are “taking this case very seriously.” “We’re waiting for computer forensic evidence to be analyzed in order to make a proper charging decision,” she said. “These types of cases are complex in nature, and we require more time to thoroughly evaluate the evidence.”‘

      I.e., even the San Francisco District Attorney’s office won’t say that they think he is guilty at this point.

      Jun 28, 2012 at 2:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Denny Smith
      Denny Smith

      Thanks, #20 Robert, and #4 Martin for putting your neurons in charge of your adrenalin and not the reverse.

      Jun 28, 2012 at 3:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James
      James

      Well he does look like a pedo in the photo in the article. Creep!

      Jun 28, 2012 at 5:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 1equalityUSA
      1equalityUSA

      #54 LaTeesha wrote, “Straight person logic: “A gay person does something bad, then all gay people are bad. A straight person does something bad, then that behavior only reflects upon the individual, not the entire heterosexual population.”

      So true. Thanks for this post.

      Jun 28, 2012 at 10:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scrotum
      Scrotum

      So all you homo’s like poop on your dicks? Hahhahaha

      Jun 28, 2012 at 8:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scrotum
      Scrotum

      What’s te difference between a homo and a refrigerator?

      A refrigerator doesn’t fart when you pull the meat out!

      Hahhahahjnanana LOL

      Jun 28, 2012 at 8:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • saopaco
      saopaco

      @ #68 – Scrotum

      So you like all that shit in yer head?

      Jun 29, 2012 at 7:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nat
      Nat

      @B:

      It’s in the same Wikipedia article which you so liberally quote from. It’s only a few lines down from what you’ve quoted. And there is a citation for it in the Wikipedia article. And it’s clear that he is supporting sexual relationships between children and adults. But please, do continue to attempt to flail around with meritless speculation.

      “Variations of this have also been said about people who were in fact innocent. At this point, the smart thing to say is that we don’t know if the charges are valid or not.”

      Except that’s not what Mulcahey said. He said that there was no way that Brinkin could be guilty. Which is prima facie absurd, because no one knows what someone is capable of until the crime becomes manifest.

      Jul 1, 2012 at 2:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Silent Majority
      Silent Majority

      See! Always knew there was a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. This proves it!

      Jul 1, 2012 at 11:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • moot magazine
      moot magazine

      @Silent Majority: Then that means there’s a connection between heterosexuality and pedophilia as well you idiot.

      Jul 2, 2012 at 12:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 71 · Nat wrote, “@B: It’s in the same Wikipedia article which you so liberally quote from” Then you should have given a proper citation – when I did a google search, nothing showed up. Don’t remember if I started the search with the word “if” in quotes, but in any case, with no citation, I simply searched. Also, your “liberally quote from” thing is a lie – I quoted two short sentences which queerty reproduced in four lines.

      Regardless, you have not shown what he actually meant. Your suggestion that it was an attempt by him to justify pederasty is not credible without some proof – the Wikipedia article states that this particular quote was made at a New York University forum, described as a remark (so I presume it was verbal) and the context of whatever they were discussing was not given. Given that, how do you rule out the possibility that he was talking about the need for role models, particularly given that the quote was dated as being made in 1983? What we do know is the source for that quote: http://spectator.org/archives/2006/10/05/when-nancy-met-harry (the Wikipedia article has a citation) which is some sort of hit piece from the American Spectator ranting about Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco political establishment in general, Mark Foley (who probably avoided San Francisco). Your quote apparently was put up by some NAMBLA people, who had (have?) their own agenda, and would probably not be above taking a statement out of context or making one up out of thin air. The source is really an attack on Nancy Pelosi in any case. Frankly, I wouldn’t give it much credibility.

      Then Nat goes on to say, “Except that’s not what Mulcahey said.” The problem with this is that I was replying to what Nat said. Mulcahey simply pointed out some of the things that had to be answered before having a chance of convicting the guy – and the D.A. apparently agrees as charges have not yet been filed. There are simply a lot of things that have to be checked and it takes time to do that. At this point, we don’t even know if they’ve found anything on his computers, disks, or flash drives.

      Jul 5, 2012 at 2:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Truth will out
      Truth will out

      Harry Hay
      Larry Brinkin?
      James Rennie(LGBT youth scotland) child abuser

      Peter Tatchell (Prominent Gay spokesperson)
      Attacks the pope over child abuse (Don’t you gays love that scandal.)
      “Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.”
      Wants the age of consent lowered. I wonder why?

      Gays should really be careful about attacking the church.

      Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, promoter of justice of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, published in ‘Avvenire’ and distributed by the Vatican Information Service on 13th March. [extract here]
      “Overall in the last nine years (2001-2010) we have considered accusations concerning around three thousand cases of diocesan and religious priests, which refer to crimes committed over the last fifty years….We can say that about sixty percent of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex.”

      This FACT is quietly ignored.

      60%??? You are 1% of the population. Granted more priests may be non outed homosexual.

      The scandal is not that priests have abused, it is that they covered it up!

      Join the dots, do the maths. Admit your community has a problem. Stop branding the truth as hate speech. truth will out. Learn from the mistakes of the catholic ch.

      Jul 20, 2012 at 1:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kirika
      Kirika

      @moot magazine: Well most convicted pedophiles are straight males. I don’t know why people seem to forget that little fact…

      Jul 25, 2012 at 3:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caroline
      Caroline

      Dr David Kenneth Cochrane Registered Sex Offender Six Counts of rape including minors, three counts of indecent assault all involving patients dating back to the early millennium. Psychiatrist 6 months in Jail, 2 years probation, including 6 month license suspension. Canada North Bay Ontario and now re-employed for the regional health centre.

      Aug 12, 2012 at 1:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.