Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
SHIP TO SHORE

UPDATE: Incriminating Photo Of Couple Arrested On Gay Cruise Surfaces

Different accounts have been reported of what Celebrity Summit passengers John Hart and Dennis Mayer were doing on their balcony when they were arrested by police on the island of Dominica. It’s also been debated how visible the men were to witnesses on the docks.

An anonymous Queerty reader has sent us this image, allegedly depicting Mayer and Hart in flagrante. It looks pretty clear that, yup, they were humping like rabbits in clear view of bystanders.

Is what they did a capital offense? Did they deserve to be taunted and humiliated?  Of course not.

But that was some pretty dumb behavior right there. Folks, if you’re gonna have sex on your balcony while your ship is docked, for God’s sake make sure you’re on the side facing the ocean!

 

By:           Dan Avery
On:           Mar 30, 2012
Tagged: , , , , ,
  • 566 Comments
    • Johnny
      Johnny

      Hot.

      You just knew that Daddy was the top when the first photos came out.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caleb
      Caleb

      I have no sympathy for these guys.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Axel Rod
      Axel Rod

      As hot at public sex is, this does seem a little over exposed. Nice bodies tho. :)

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jonjon
      jonjon

      I was totally on their side and thinking it was wrongful discrimination when I first heard this story, but now…seeing those photos…um. No. That’s definitely indecent exposure.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeE
      MikeE

      stupid stupid stupid men.
      they deserved what they got.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dsp
      dsp

      What idiots! I mean I wouldn’t care seeing it or not (been to many places were i’ve seen public sex and enjoyed it) but come on guys, having everyone on the dock being able to catch a glimpse? Really dumb! They deserved what they got!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bigg
      Bigg

      My, what a fickle bunch we are at best. The lesson to take home here is still not to travel to anti-gay destinations, whether or not you’re prone to boneheaded public sexual displays.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      You don’t do that in public view. You don’t do that at a foreign island that is anti-gay. Did the smallest amount of common sense ever cross their minds?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nick
      Nick

      tacky but hot

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jase
      Jase

      “Did they deserve to be taunted and humiliated?”

      Yes, and they should be shunned for being such lying scumbags.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      Was just a matter of time before a pic showed up. And now lets hear from all the apologiest calling for boycotts of Atlantis and hating on Dominica, whom I again didn’t have a problem with the 2k+ gays who visited the Island that day with out being subjected to homophobia or arrest.

      BTW, they knew EXACTLY what they were doing and their little pitty party media effort is an embarrassment to the gay community.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Franco
      Franco

      I don’t understand why they felt compelled to have sex on their balcony and why anyone gives a shit!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kim123
      Kim123

      @Bigg: They should have been arrested in any destination including in America.Why did they feel that it was OK to have sex in broad daylife with people walking by downstairs. Pathetic IMO

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Buddy
      Buddy

      They got what the deserved. I expect a personal letter of apology after all that ‘we are victims’ bullshit.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pedro
      Pedro

      eww…Old people and public sex do not mix…it’s kinda funny in a sordid way, but hot? Lo siento…I don’t find men my dad’s age attractive…LOL!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Johnny
      Johnny

      Wow. A lot of bitchy gays coming out of the woodwork.

      Yes this was tacky and inappropriate but get over it.
      Calling people disgusting and vile just makes you sound like an ass.

      And denouncing “hedonism”??–hilarious. What do you think vacation is supposed to be?
      Since when did this community become such a sad puritanical place?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Axel Rod
      Axel Rod

      @Jase: wow. I don’t think I want you in my queer family, too much hate and anger.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      drinking and drugging make you do some stupid things.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Adrian
      Adrian

      balcony sex is interesting because you are in clear view of the public yet you are on private property. change two factors in this story, say they were a man and a woman having sex inside the sliding doors with the curtains pulled and still visible to the crowd below would there be grounds for an arrest?

      makes me think of New York’s Standard Hotel
      http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/06/standard_hotel.html

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Spike: This doesn’t change the fact that Atlantis is funnelling boatloads of cash to anti-Gay governments in Dominica, St Lucia, Grenada (where two local LGBT people were arrested this year for private consensual sex between non-related adults), Barbados and RUSSIA (!).

      Nor does this picture show Atlantis’ dismissal of legitimate LGBT human rights concerns of local LGBT communities in the communities in which they visit.

      Just because some party boys on the Atlantis Cruise acted like idiots doesn’t answer the question as to why Atlantis went there in the first place.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Axel Rod
      Axel Rod

      Wow, who let in all the prudes. They made a mistake, all this self piety here is really disconcerting.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Johnny
      Johnny

      @ Houston Bill:

      Preach.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tyler
      Tyler

      Um yeah they asked for it. Sorry. As horrible as the conditions were in the jail, you can’t be that dumb to not know what you were doing. They obviously don’t know right from wrong.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barbarian
      Barbarian

      Okay…that was wildly inappropriate! Why would they do that? I totally thought they were being wrongful accused at first, but come on!?! IDIOTS! Someone commented that this was tacky…well, I would add gross. lol.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • blakjaxx
      blakjaxx

      bottom line, they lied, and why they didn’t think in this age of camera phones they wouldn’t be found out I don’t know. Should they have been humiliated no, arrested yes, if they’d pulled this crap in the US they would have been arrested

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JohnAGJ
      JohnAGJ

      @Axel Rod: And they were justly arrested for their “mistake”. That this occurred in an anti-gay country like Dominica makes no difference. Look, I don’t know them and will hold no grudges against either them. If they have any measure of self-respect they’re probably very embarassed by everything that happened. Ok, great. Yet they lied about being poor lil’ victims when their behavior is what got them into trouble, not their sexual orientation. While the parading them around was a bit much their arrest and conviction were well-deserved.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JP
      JP

      They booked the cruise, they knew what islands they were going to. Have some respect, if your going to fuck on the balcony do it while at sea. Pay your fine and move on with life. You were in the wrong. Even if it was Man on Man, Man on girl or girl on girl. Have respect for others. That is who I want in my human family, gay or not.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Russell Langley
      Russell Langley

      We don’t like it when heterosexuals do this in public, why should we act differently? We want equality but then this sort of thing just gives the hate mongers ammunition to continue with inequality. Come on guys, you are grown adult men, act like it in public. Let’s keep our personal lives in the bedroom and we will gain much more respect from those who are attacking us.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Farquart
      Farquart

      I knew they were lying, and they had the audacity to come home and have their lies printed in the newspaper and in television interviews.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bailey
      Bailey

      the perv on the balcony above them is masturbating to their sex grunts.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @Houston Bill: And if these boys weren’t fucking on the balcony, exactly as the first reports indicated, and exactly what is seen in the picture, no one would know or care that Atlantis stopped in Dominica except for those whom chose to book the cruise.

      Your questions that are NOT APPLICABLE.

      These idiots are lucky they were only charged with indecent exposure and it will be no surprise that they will have no comment about the matter once this picture goes viral.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Noel
      Noel

      The one guy is a retired cop (only 41 they say?…really?)and as exciting as public sex can be, they had no regard for the Islanders just metres away. They deserved to get punished however I’m not for “how” they were treated. An ex cop should know better, heck, everyone should know better. Now, if they were the cabin next to mine?…I totally would’ve watched!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeE
      MikeE

      Amazing that there are still people who are trash-talking Dominica… these two idiots were arrested.. and RELEASED. If Dominica were such a horrible place, they would (and if you ask me, SHOULD) have been imprisoned. Instead, they paid a fine and were released.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      Speaking as someone who was on that boat, Dominica is a nice place to visit, the people were nice to us and we had a lot of fun.. Unfortunately these balcony boys weren’t thinking and that put a damper on everyone else’s fun..for about 5 seconds.. Atlantis Cruises are awesome, and believe it or not just about everyone on that boat goes there for the parties, relaxation, socialization, and sun.. Sure there is a LOT of sex going on too, some of it a little more broadcasted then others, but that is not the reason we all go on these cruises. This is just an example of a stupid incident getting blown way out of proportion.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      You know, at this point WE CAN NO LONGER ASSUME Dominica acted out of homophobia during this incident. Given what we know now, what we SEE know, it’s entirely possible it was fueled by quite justifiable gay-irrelevant outrage; ie, outrage which would have occurred regardless of whether the couple was gay or straight.

      Is Dominica homophobic? You know, I do not believe was can answer that question, one way or the other. Not seeing what we see now. This is now NO LONGER a gay rights issue. It’s just a sad, unfortunate issue, which because this couple happened to be gay, is going to set back any progress on gay rights in Dominica for years to come.

      Dominica is owed an apology.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gigi
      Gigi

      @Pedro: Oh fickle young Pedro. Those words will come back to bite you in the ass one day.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      LIARS ! ! ! !

      “We went to a couple different islands, and when we arrived in Dominica, we walked out onto our balcony naked,” John Hart said.

      “We actually got a phone call and asked if we could come down to guest relations, that the captain would like to speak with us,” Hart said.

      “I immediately asked them is this an investigation. Is there any reason we should believe we should need counsel or contact someone from the U.S. Embassy? The assistant captain told me he did not believe so,” Dennis Mayer said.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scott
      Scott

      Interesting how this one single photo changes everyone’s minds.

      But notice how the VIDEO of an nearly unscathed George Zimmerman from a POLICE STATION is preventing justice for Trayvon Martin.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the other Greg
      the other Greg

      The saddest thing about this circus is it’s probably made life worse, in the short term, for gay people stuck living in Dominica.

      Yet we still hear all the pathetic whining about these guys’ “humiliation.” Looks like that was part of the thrill for them.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      These appear to be men with low standards. I have no sympathy for men.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      There is another component here. Was this cruise promoted as one of those “anything goes” environments? If so, while, yes, they should have used more common sense and discretion, you can’t really blame people for taking advantage of such an environment if it was promoted as such.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 1equalityUSA
      1equalityUSA

      Ahoy, maties. Swinging th’ lamp and rocking th’ boat with all hands on deck, hoist the moor to the bitter end and overhaul the spanker mast, lo, saltie seamen, safe harbour will take the wind out of your sails and the skipper’s given a wide berth, yar, mind th’ stern, mind th’ stern, bulwark’s ahead, Cap’n Crunch.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Steve: Dominica has arrested 35 people in the last couple of years for the crime of ‘buggery’, a law which exists for the sole purpose of criminalizing the LGBT community on that island.

      Perhaps Mr Hart et al may owe Dominica an apology. Not just for their lying, but for their behavior, which regardless of the anti-gay laws, is really beyond the pale. I don’t owe Dominica an apology. Its an anti-Gay country. There have been prominent calls for Dominica to repeal its’ discriminatory legislation by the UN, the British Commonwealth, and many LGBT Adovocay organizations. Dominica is reportedly not interested in repealing the law.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Shannon1981: I’m not a defender of Atlantis here. Just see my comments criticizing them…but…on these cruises there are warnings to not offend the staff and others by being naked even in public areas of the ship. Now I’ve never heard Atlantis warn the cruisers, its against the law to be gay at this stop, but I have heard warnings about public nudity. I don’t think that Atlantis’ marketing in that regard is going to make them responsible for the idiots behavior.

      That being said.

      I can certainly multitask by saying the two men acted like idiots while at the same time criticizing Atlantis for continuing to funnel boatloads of cash to anti-Gay countries.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • devon in CA
      devon in CA

      Pretty sad balcony spectacle I’d say.
      They’re probably gay republicans- lots of that type in palm springs.
      I bet that they’re quite embarrassed now, and drinking heavily to boot.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @the other Greg: You are correct in that the actions of Mr Hart et al will probably set back the cause of decriminalization of being Gay in Dominica as well as feed opposition to LGBT rights on the island.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Done with this
      Done with this

      To do so in full glare of the people at the dock, kids included is just NASTY!!! But to then lie about it, trash talk the islanders, make the world castigate the Dominicans…..EVIL! They deserve every ounce of humiliation they get.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      I think Atlantis does use sex acts to market its cruises. Very tacky in my opinion. It seems to be like a floating brothel.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill
      Bill

      @Shannon: Even if that was so, it goes without saying that you cannot subject unwilling eyes of citizens on shore to your “anything goes” cruise. Disappointed in you today Shannon.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason Parsley
      Jason Parsley

      Anyway you can send a high res image of this to me at Jason.Parsley@sfgn.com .?. We’d like to run it in next week’s edition of the paper with an update. Thanks!

      Editor in Chief
      South Florida Gay News

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DonsterNYC
      DonsterNYC

      These two are damn lucky that the judge didn’t have this pic. Had he, they would be rotting in a Dominica prison. Sad because Atlantis will no doubt reevaluate hosting these gay cruises in the future.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lane
      Lane

      Sadly they got allot of publicity for being arrested and they acted like they were innocent. Picture shows they weren’t. Great fodder for the far right. They are poor representatives of our community.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Benjamin
      Benjamin

      There is a certain sub-category of gay men who lack any sense of propriety or any understanding of limits. They are a minority, but they give all of us a bad name. This is not about being a prude or insisting that no one have sex on vacation. It is a matter of understanding that there is a time and a place and a manner for all things. Straight guys hook up with women on cruises, but they don’t act like this. And straight singles cruises are not a gigantic drug binge. These 2 clowns are the same as the fools who participate in the gay pride parades wearing nothing more than a jock strap. There is something not right in the head. These people should be shunned until they can control themselves.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew
      Andrew

      Self centred idiots who were very lucky to get away with being arrested for indecent exposure. To f*ck in full view of the shore is simply stupid. I hope they learned a lesson from this. What is just as bad is they played the victims rather than keeping quiet and embarrassed by their actions.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dame
      Dame

      Now can we stop the debate on whether the cruise was on fault, or the dumbasses? Thank you.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • randy
      randy

      @Johnny: The fact is that the couple has very publically stated that they did NOT have sex.

      It’s now clear that they lied to everyone. For that they deserve all the catcalls that we can heap upon them.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Axel Rod
      Axel Rod

      Y’all just givin’ me a headache now…

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Samuel
      Samuel

      @Gigi: Gigi: You’re a lot nicer than I would have been… good for you for taking the high road and pointing out to this young whipper snapper that some day he too will be chasing after younger men with the same feelings he’s having about older men at this age! Frankly, I was probably much of the same mind as him when I was young, but I fell in love with one of the most sexy older man I have aver met when I was just in my twenties… and thank the Lord above for making me see the errors of my ways by just sticking to the young stuff until then! Only an older man knows how to truely make love to a younger man and make him feel very sexy and special. The young ones are only good for cumming and going in my opinion… in most cases even making you feel like you were in the room at all…now and back then too! Good for you! I like your style!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert

      Idiots – no one at fault but them so their defenders should STFU. Glad they were arrested and humiliated. No wonder we have ‘PR’ issues….

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Yep
      Yep

      I thought it was strange that there were so many eye witness accounts including fellow passengers so I didnt believe John Hart when he pulled the “Gay Card”. Glad my cynicism was NOT misplaced. Horrible people! Just horrible

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • thick
      thick

      sakway bogara

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Shannon1981: Please share the Atlantis link where these cruises are promoted as anything goes. Otherwise, please stop making things up. Your continued desperate need to defend these idiots is embarrassing.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MEJ
      MEJ

      @Spike:

      And if these boys weren’t fucking on the balcony…no one would know or care that Atlantis stopped in Dominica except for those whom chose to book the cruise.

      Wow, Spike. I wondered why you were so pissy, and now I know–this story has exposed the fact that Atlantis takes gay passengers to anti-gay locations. Something they do not disclose when a person is booking the cruise, and don’t bother to inform passengers until they have actually docked at these anti-gay locations.

      We were all wrong for defending these two men, but you and Rich Campbell are wrong for defending Atlantis’ destinations.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie in Charge
      Charlie in Charge

      There are so very many places in our world where you can have public sex if you want. Wisdom and perspective were needed here.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @Bigg: How can anyone make this anything but about two idiots being idiots. Being gay doesn’t excuse you from being a dumbass.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bailey
      Bailey

      @randy:

      While I can agree the picture does look suggestive, you can’t say they were having sex without the video… where is the video? Don’t these queens have iphones?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      1. They had sex in public
      2. No one forced them to have sex in public
      3. No one forced them to go on a cruise that goes to questionable locations
      4. They lied

      END OF DISCUSSION.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      Dominica joins 84 nations in signing UN statement defending LGBT people — or JOINED actually, nearly a year ago. Long before the Atlantis cruise visited.

      http://thedominican.net/2011/04/dominica-signs-un-statement.html

      http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/03/158847.htm

      Mar 30, 2012 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @MEJ: Back to that tired arguement again are we? News flash, anywhere and at any time u may encounter anti-gay behavior, talk about prissy, do u really need a sign warning you? 2k+ gay passengers apparently didn’t come across any of this anti-gay u reference, just the two guys fucking on the balcony. Why do u suppose? Curious your continued need to condemn Atlantis in light I’d indisputable evidence and their playing the gay card. Figures an ex cop would immed. Deny and hope no such evidence would be revealed.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave

      Sad to say, but this gives new meaning the the expression “Ugly Americans”

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      While the picture is consistent with them having sex, it is also consistent with one simply standing behind the other and hugging – a possibility given that they could have just had sex in their room and would have to wait a bit due to the refractory period, which increases with age.

      Also judging from the sizes of objects and the view of the ceiling the picture was either significantly enlarged or taken with a telephoto lens, or it was taken by someone fairly close but well above the dock.

      Regardless, Dominica deserves to be criticized for its sodomy law, and the reason has nothing to do with the two characters in the photo. It also deserves criticism for the over-the-top public reaction. If it was a straight couple, they might be dragged off to see the judge and fined, but you wouldn’t have had a mob watching them being dragged around by the police.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dominican gayguy
      dominican gayguy

      as hot as y guys r we dont do our business so boldly.. srry guys but im sorry we r a small country news travels fast and lasts 4 eva…

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @B: Once again, being doesn’t excuse you for being a dumbass.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MEJ
      MEJ

      @Spike:

      Yes, Spike, I’m sure the last thing you, or your overseers at Atlantis wants to discuss is taking gay passengers to anti-gay destinations. Using your logic, you can become sick for any number of reasons, so might as well have unsafe sex with everyone.

      I wrote pissy, not prissy. In either case, you’re both,

      When a gay cruise, marketed by gay people, to gay people takes me to an anti-gay local, then yes, I do expect a sign telling me that this local is anti-gay.

      As far as the other passengers, since they were stuck on a boat a long way from home, I guess they had no choice but to accept it. And unless you’re personally spoken with every passenger, you have no idea of any of them encountered anti-gay bias.

      Because Atlantis continues to book gay passengers on a gay cruise to anti-gay locations, I will continue to condemn Atlantis. Clearly you are pissed off that this situation exposed that fact. How much business do you think Atlantis will lose because of this? I’m hoping a lot.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @B: Once again, being gay doesn’t excuse you for being a dumbass.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mate
      Mate

      @Bailey: No, the were not having sex! They were just standing next to each other naked waiting for a photo to be removed! YAY! Stupes! Talking about where is the video!!!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jj
      jj

      Thats fucking gross. I wouldnt even do that and im a huge slut.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jp
      Jp

      @Johnny: this vacation was hardly puritanical…most of us think with our brains, though…

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jp
      Jp

      @MEJ: The cruise director made it clear to go on excursions on Dominica…they made it subtly clear this was not the best place to be….people need to do a little research…and not hold anyone but themselves accountable for their decisions or actions

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mate
      Mate

      @B: It seems you living in Dominica to know what mob or not would be there! Of course it would have a mob because people would want to know who did it. We’re a small nation! Everyday by the court house have a mob of people to see what’s going on! GET A LIFE!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • W2M
      W2M

      Deck two of the Celebrity Summit – looks like one of the Deluxe Ocean View staterooms in the bow. Either 2002 or 2008. Practically on the dock. Idiots.

      well. I like the eye contact daddy gives the photo-taker.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jakeinlove
      jakeinlove

      Uh, was this even necessary to print?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Just being real
      Just being real

      Stupid attention whores. They certainly got it, and then of course lied about it when they should have just said, “Yes we had sex in public view on our hotel balcony.” instead of becoming total drama queens about it and professional victims.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MEJ
      MEJ

      @Jp:

      Were potential customers told the ship would be docking at anti-gay locations, before they bought their passage?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • shannon
      shannon

      THERE IS ———-NOTHING———- HOT ABOUT THESE UGLY ASS MEN!! WHY DO GAY WHITE MEN ALWAYS THINK THEY CAN GO OTHER COUNTRIES/CULTURES/RACES/GROUPS AND DISRESPECT THEIR WAY AND CUSTOMS?????? THEY GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED…..THEY ARE LUCKY TO HAVE MADE IT BACK ALIVE….IDIOTS..

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Donni
      Donni

      @Houston Bill: Because Dominica has anti-gay laws but they are not enforced. The country actually doesn’t really care about homosexuality. It kind of a ‘you do what you do in your bed and I can’t be bothered’ There are some idiots who seem as though they don’t have anything to do with their lives that actually protest and shiz like that. I’m sure there are people like that in every country. The country on a whole actually welcomes everyone, even gays to their country. So they had no problem with the ship coming to the country thus why not bring them. The laws of the country haven’t been changed since the realllllllllllly old days

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Donni
      Donni

      I was at school when this happened :| The day i decide not to pass on the bay front to say hello to random tourist, this happens. CURSE YOU SCHOOL!!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DOMINICAN
      DOMINICAN

      HELLO!!!!!!!!! IF THEY DID THIS SHIT IN THE UNITES STATES OF AMERICA THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH INDESCENT EXPOSURE (for the least)…no matter their SEXUALITY!!! making it worse they were GAYS doing it in public in front of CHILDREN AND ALL…u guys were not there…IT WAS JUST FUCKING DISRESPECTFUL

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jackie Beat
      Jackie Beat

      @Shannon1981: As an entertainer on this particular cruise (and many other Atlantis events) I can say NO, these cruises are NOT “anything goes!” One of the first things the guests are told is that there is a CODE OF CONDUCT and it is no different for Gay Cruises than for Aunt Helen and Uncle Joe’s cruise next week! People are free to show affection, wear next to nothing and have a great time, but there is a line.

      The real point here is this: Had this been a straight couple and even had it been in a US dock — they would have been arrested! Everyone save your gay outrage for when it actually applies.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      Of course everyone wants to see the pictures and this should be on TMZ. But where is the video? Are we living in the stone-age before moving pictures were invented?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dvlaries
      dvlaries

      If the people on shore could see them, they could see the people on shore. If the people on shore were close enough to photograph them, the two men could have photographed the people on shore.

      Even knowing that, they went ahead with what they did, got caught, and as the photo proves, lied about it. I’m not worried about however much sympathy from me that’s supposed to still foster.

      I’m presuming the authorities didn’t know about the photographic evidence, and Mayer & Hart ought to be damn glad to be out of their grasp before it surfaced.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JO
      JO

      That reminds me of the hand puppet game me and my friend used to play!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      They might have a fetish for exhibitionism. The older guy – the presumed sugar Daddy – should have known better.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 8:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 74 · Michael wrote, “@B: Once again, being doesn’t excuse you for being a dumbass.”

      Michael needs to learn that, if he is going to use terms like “dumbass”, he should first learn to write coherent English. Michael also needs to learn to avoid jumping to conclusions. The picture Queerty showed is not proof the couple were having sex in public. It is pretty clear they were naked in public.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @B: Naked/Sex = indecent exposure. They got busted. Also, while you worry about my grammar I’ll champion an ACTUAL gay cause.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GamePro
      GamePro

      @Kev C: I did like the Duke Nukem link though… Thanks… saved me from searching myself… My Name’s GamePro… Duh… lol… I love Nukem… Been playing since the days of Windows 95… Although you are a sperm dump literally… But you give me a good laugh… lol…

      Oh and Please behave… go satisfy your porn needs else where. SMH… as if pictures was not enough, now you want videos to fantasize on… Shame… looking for opportunity in those fellas ordeal… But that’s the kinda JUNK that KFC (Kev C) is defined as.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bailey
      Bailey

      @DOMINICAN:

      and children are on the dock of a gay cruise ship because….?

      The picture is suggestive, but not proof of public sex.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GamePro
      GamePro

      @JohnAGJ: The Parading around was just a Fab… Just like everything else that came from the lying tonge of these two. The guys were bought to court. They were taken from a vehicle at the Police department straight down to the court. Because people knew that they were to appear in court the following day… they gathers through curiousity. Railings were actually present to avoid people from getting in close proximity to these guys…

      They were treated no differently from any other offender… If anything it was that they got a little leniency… These guys are seasoned liars in addition to much of what else that has already been said bout them.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ambrose
      Ambrose

      These jerks are a disgrace, as much for their massive lying as for their inconsiderate public sex in view of a general public. I’m embarrassed that I believed them and defended them. I and others asked, “would a straight couple have been treated the same way?” Well, judging from that photo, I’d have to say: yes, at least as far as getting arrested, convicted and fined. They should have just admitted what they did, apologized, then disappeared from public view. Instead of doing the first two, then disavowing most of it to the American press.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RLS
      RLS

      The balcony sex isn’t gross, as a matter of fact, it’s kind of hot. But what is gross is these guys trying to make themselves into Professional Gay Victims when they were/are just a couple of hornballs getting laid. This shit does not make us look good.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      Wow, what a bunch of prudish queens setting gay rights back. Oh noes! The childrens may see sex! Oh no, what will happen! Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It seems 95% of Queerty’s commenters need to go back to Iran.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WMW
      WMW

      To the ageist folks who commented about the couple’s being “old” and “ugly”: their behavior was foolish, inconsiderate, unlawful and ridiculously easy to avoid. Whether or not they meet someone’s standard of beauty is beside the point.

      Your obsession with a narrow idea of acceptable looks is no better than these men perpetrating the notion that public sex, in an unwelcome context, is our right, just because we’re Queer.

      I’m no prude. I’ve gotten turned on myself during sex where there’s risk of exposure…but am still very, very careful. if you cross a certain line, you’re involving people who haven’t consented.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Texndoc
      Texndoc

      “Gay rights” means fucking in public? Gee, who’s “setting gay rights back” you moron.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      @Texndoc: Not to mention the dude uses a term in a derogatory way to explain anyone who has a differing opinion from him. I am sure he is so concerned with gay rights when he can’t even respect his own peers who think differently than him.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @Bailey: Give it a day or two and the video will show up, and the apologists who continue to post will claim you can’t actually see penetration. Apparently Chi Chi LaRue wasn’t directing.

      Question to the apologists, when they did the TV interview after they returned to Palm Springs, the younger one stated that they were only on the balcony naked, LIE. The older followed up in ref. to the call they received by saying . . ARE WE BEING INVESTIGATED, DO WE NEED TO CONTACT THE US EMBASSY?

      For and ex.cop, who just had his dick in his bf’s ass on the balcony in full view of the port, sounding a tad guilty? Why even answer the phone? Why not find some indiscriminate location on the ship and lay low?

      Do we need to contact the US Embassy? Wonder how many Atlantis Cruisers have ever had to say that? I’m guessing, none, well, one, now. And for the record, been on 4, over it, have met and find Rich Campbell to be a gay that has succeeded despite himself. Oh yea, and I’m not Asian.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DAlady
      DAlady

      Guys I’m not sure where you all are getting the notion that Dominican gays are oppressed! That’s so funny! lols It just shows me that maybe you guys need to travel a little bit more. Americans can be quite naiive about the world outside their borders. Your media is awful these days. They pounce without even researching.

      People I’m now 31 years and I was born and raised on the island of Dominica. I know off many gay and lesbians who lived most of their lives in Dominica. One of my best friends in an all girls catholic high school was a lesbian. My high school year if you do the maths 1993-1998. She always acted like a boy and was never bullied. If anything she was doing alot of the pushing around because she could be quite intimidating :).

      I think the mass community of Dominicans are such passive people in that respect. All they ask for is to keep your buisness private. Homosexuality in the Caribbean is Taboo. In Dominica it doesn’t bring anything else but a ton of gossip. No one is immune from gossip in Dominica believe me. My personal experience being straight in Dominica is about the same. When I was a teenager I kissed a guy in public and my name spread within my community. Not because they hate me but they just didn’t think it was the right way to behave in public. My mother was not happy at all and all my family got to know. From my knowledge No one has been stoned, beaten up, murdered, raped because they are gay.

      You have to understand this is a very small island and news (gossip) spread like wildfire. Having a gay ship docked at the harbor is like the equivalent to Lady Gaga giving a free concert. Everybody wants to see.lols

      The last gay ship was 10 years or so ago and was quite newsworthy. It left without incident. Second ship this one with Hart and Mayer and they were the oly two idiots to cause contraversy.

      People didn’t come out to ridicule them the gay ship. They just wanted to watch and plus people are at that harbor everyday all day. Its like a very popular meeting place. I lived less than a half mile away and as a child I was there almost everyday watching the boats dock. Imagine children of any parental background (black, white, straight, gay) witnessing this behavior. The men who did this are an embarassment to your community.

      Granted there are still ancient laws from british colonization still on the books. Hart and mayer said they were taunted in the jail. Come one show me one US jail or prison that don’t have people who taunt. It doesn’t mean the entire prison body does so? They deserved to be taunted not for their sexuality but their behavior.
      Ask yourselves if we weren’t welcoming why would we allow the boat to come not once but twice? I think the reason why the police may have felt so inclined to charge for buggery was because of the blatant disrespect as you guys have seen above. The people at the court house are there everyday minding people buisness. I can tell you guys all their names from watching the pictures posted online when the two men were brought to court.:) These people love gossip and are there everyday unless it’s a habitual criminal. :) Everybody gets the walk of shame in Dominica. Sorry Hart and Mayer you were not that special. But the funny thing is what many locals feel is preferential treatment to American tourists occured with Hart and Mayer. Its wrong that they got their case called so quickly and were back in the United States and had the nerve to dirty my country’s name is such a manner.

      I live in the US about 9 years now and pay taxes, dress appropriately, support good causes like gay and women’s rights. I obey your laws even those I find ridiculous. I could never expose my self like that anywhere in the united states and got my case called so quickly.

      Dominica is a beautiful place and our people are gossipy. Trust me I know! But the media attack brought on by these two were uncalled for. I saw people wishing for my people’s death, hurricanes to attack the island, our volcanoes to erupt and burn my people etc etc etc. Totally unnecessary bad wishes against a country unlike others welcomed even against their own laws. But believe what you must. Just know there are many Dominicans living in the United States and Dominica who’ve walked in your parades and supported your community.

      We are not perfect but we’re getting there. Those gay laws may never leave our books because we do things differently than America. 85-90% of our population is Catholic the rest are of Rastarfarian beliefs and other christian religions. You can see our battle right? Compared to your country with so many non beleivers and you’re still unable to that acceptance in your own American cities. I Know guys have many states that don’t support you. Only 8 states allow gays to marry in the US. I think you guys should work on your own people first than Dominicans. If you don’t bring disrespectful behavior here you will get treated wonderful. Case in point: ask Johnny Depp and the crew from pirates of the Caribbean 1, 2, 3, Tom Cruise, the governor of vermont and many Americans who’ve visited. We have crimes like anywhere else. That can’t be avoided but compared to other places this paradise!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 9:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeyM
      MikeyM

      @1equalityUSA:
      I have taken many cruises and people who choose to have sex on the board (not everyone goes on the cruises to get laid) usually do it in the dark at night in front of the ship with…no lights. These guys obviously couldn’t wait till the Sun went down or in their cabin with the curtains closed.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GamePro
      GamePro

      @DAlady: You sound like a Dominican Scholar… You are so right on the money with your comment. It may not be understood by those who can’t relate to it but you are absolutely spot on with your comment.

      Brilliant… Just a pity some might still not be able to relate to this kind of culture spoken of…

      Hat’s of again DAlady…

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DA me come from
      DA me come from

      I am from Dominica and must say that this story was not shocking to me. I remember as a child seeing tourists having sex in plain view on our beaches. This should serve as a lesson to others. We do not care if you are gay or straight, you need to be mindful of the culture of your planned cruise ship stops. For the person who asked what the children were doing on the docks – obviously you have not traveled to small countries. In certain cultures that couple would have been shot for such behavior. You would not do it in your own country, do not do it in mine!!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ealan14
      Ealan14

      OK, Yes, Dominica needs to calm down, but these guys were idiots. That was just asking for trouble. This reminds me so much of the dummies that are always out trolling parks and public bathrooms to have sex. Its completely inappropriate.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PTBoat
      PTBoat

      @Johnny: How do you know he’s a top? They might take turns. But seriously, way to cause an international scandal and to hurt the image of your fellows who are trying for equality. Disgusting.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wilmer
      Wilmer

      I am upset that they did not get the jail time that they richly deserved rather than a small fine. They got off too easy!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @Houston Bill:

      LOL you were screaming your tits off about discrimination and you were one of those that was demanding photo evidence. Well now you got it. Hopefully the Dominican government doesn’t ask for their extradition to be charged with buggery because queens like you demanded evidence.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Al
      Al

      No straight couple would get away with this either.

      This guys are pitiful. They played up the victim card.

      They deserved to be shunned from the gay community for it.

      God, talk about being a stereotype.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Al
      Al

      @Wilmer: Interesting choice of words.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Terry
      Terry

      Finally the photo we’ve all been asking for in my far too many contributions discussing this on the Atlantis Events Page! Regardless, I’m less ashamed of the, ummm, shamelessly tacky activity on that balcony than I am about the truly cruel and bitchy queens commenting on the article and incident saying that this couple “deserved” their horrible night in jail or worse! Must we all be haters? This couple faced a very real possibility of 10 years (!) incarceration for “buggery” or “gross indecency” (laws ratified in Dominica in 1998)… and our lovely gay men’s “community” can’t have the decency to offer some sympathy? :-( Gawd forbid any of you ever get caught for some indiscretion and need some forgiveness. Go ahead and cast the first stone if you’re without any sins. ne!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @Shannon1981:

      The cruises are not advertised as “anything goes”. From day one, they make it very clear to “keep it in your rooms”.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @Andy:

      The children “may” see sex? Umm, there were tons of children at the end of the pier. And, look at the pic of the older guy. He’s staring right at them. Don’t be an idiot.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J Stratford
      J Stratford

      well facts are stubborn things.
      1. Atlantis should be criticized for putting gay money into anti-gay governments
      2. These 2 gays are L-I-A-R-S. They should have owned up to being naked and having sex, instead of lying to the public and crying for being arrested.
      2. These 2 gays are dumb. They let their small brain do the thinking. Just because you are on a cruise doesnt mean you have to act dumb. Hedonism is best enjoyed while being smart.
      3. If you’re gay, don’t visit Dominica. Or visit but don’t have sex while there. Any kind of sex. You don’t know what would happen to you once they know you are gay. Remember, they threatened to look into their anuses to prove that they committed buggery. Without a lawyer (like they did) you are helpless.
      4. If you’re gay and from Dominica, get out!!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @Bailey:

      The children were at the END of the dock. Try to picture this: There’s a ship, tied to a dock, the dock is 50 yards long, and at the end of the dock is the city of Roseau, downtown Roseau actually, with dozens of children there greeting passengers. They weren’t on the ship. Why is it so hard for some of you to wrap your head around the truth?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DAlady
      DAlady

      Terry@ Its not their indiscretion that bother me is where it occured and the tainting of a country of people who welcomed the boat even against its own laws. You are ignorant and you certainly don’t care about 70,000 people whose reputation has been harmed. But should I be surprised? It’s not the fact that you gay that has been baffled but it’s the Americans sentiment of forget about it instead of considering the long consequences for my people of Dominica.

      This is why minoritity groups in the USA can’t move forward. Its because of attitudes like yours and the men. They lied and I’m proud of those people who’ve come out apologized. Has anyone even bothered to ask the rest of the passengers what their experience was like? From what I know there were over 2000 LGBT on that boat besides these two.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @B:

      Why is it so hard for you to accept the truth from cruisers who are posting here telling you what happened? There is no telephoto lens required. The ship was at the end of a 50 yard pier. And the end of the pier is literally downtown Roseau. Everyone, on the dock could see them in plain sight, no squinting required, Celebrity crew saw them, locals saw them including children, Atlantis crew saw them and so did many, many passengers.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pazmateo
      Pazmateo

      @Jase: Agreed.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pazmateo
      Pazmateo

      @Terry: “some indiscretion” hardly describes blatent and graphic public sex. I’m a complete and total voyeur and this creeps me out.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 10:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pickles
      Pickles

      They were having sex, not sacrificing children. Jesus. Couldn’t they have just be given a fine and sent on their way? Gay, straight or otherwise, they weren’t hurting anyone.

      Everyone here is acting like it’s rational for two people (of any gender or sexual orientation) to be ARRESTED for having sex.

      People have sex in parked cars, in bathroom, in the library stacks, anywhere and everywhere.
      Whoever works on the ship should have been informed and they should have been asked to keep it in their room and given a fine. END OF

      What is it about sex that makes people lose their minds?

      If (as so many people say) the folks in that particular docking point are so used to having cruse ships show up then I’d bet the farm that wasn’t the first or the last time a drunken couple is caught having sex in view of the locals.

      Turn your head and keep walking.

      The idea that folks are even WILLING to support the extremity of laws about consensual sexual behavior shocks me.

      Even IN the united states, the sex crimes laws are out of control because of the puritanical panic about ANY kind of sex adjacent activity.

      Any country where Sodomy is a crime and those convicted can be sentenced to 10 years in prison can not claim to be gay positive (I don’t care WHO lives there).

      If sodomy is illegal then all sex should be illegal otherwise you’re singling out a type of sex act that is presumed to primarily involve gay men and THAT is homophobia.

      They were wrong for having sex outside on their balcony ON THE SHIP but it’s not like they should be banished to hell for it. I mean it’s not that deep.

      Children are not scared by seeing people having sex. It happens all the time and no one is any worse for the wear.

      Personally, I would have said ANYTHING to get me out of jail and out of a country where I might go to jail for 10 years for a consensual sex act and I daresay so would most of you.

      A fine for indecent exposure seem reasonable.

      All the hysteria and judgmental crap does not, IMO.

      People get crazy on vacation, again, it’s not like they hurt anyone.

      I’ve seen more outrageous behavior during Mardi Gras or during Gay Pride in full daylight.

      It will be a cold day in hell before I take the side of a country that outlaws sex between two consenting, adult men.

      As far as I’m concerned, if they were still on the ship, the captain should have had priority and should have taken care of it and police from shore should have had no right to board the ship.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Terry
      Terry [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Pickles: Amen, brother!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • I wonder....
      I wonder....

      If they lied about having sex, what else did they lie about??? They were not paraded around the street people they were driven to the court house and then escorted by police to the bank to get the payment for the fines then back. Once the fines were paid they were escorted back to the police vehicle and driven to the airport. Yet they were treated so inhumanely?? These guys are such LIARS and bit by bit Dominica and Dominicans will be vindicated with the proof of photos and eyewitness accounts. They give gays a bad name…don’t they know their actions will get all of us branded in the same bracket?? In the same manner that the gay community has branded Dominica as an anti-gay port that targets gays??? SO WRONG!!!!!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Terry
      Terry [Different person #1 using similar name]

      And so the “love” continues. I guess I might as well be meta-self-righteous and quote John 8: >>They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.<<

      You don't need to throw them under the bus to condemn the behavior. The lying after the fact is particularly distasteful to me — by being shameless, they did not consider the harm they brought to the reputation of Atlantis and Dominica.

      But if we can't find forgiveness in our hearts for an activity that in many countries is still punishable by death; then we forever condemn ourselves to judgement. How can our community move forward if we "eat our own"? Must we all be "normal" and "acceptable" in order to gain basic civil rights?

      Have thoughts of peace, love each other, and have a great weekend!

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      Why didn’t these men hold still long enough for a daguerreotype? Or a fast oil painting? Then they could claim artistic license for their act. Performance art .. meh, I’ve seen worse.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DAlady
      DAlady

      @ pickles

      you said: “It will be a cold day in hell before I take the side of a country that outlaws sex between two consenting, adult men.”

      why don’t you worry about existing laws in the US that outlaw consensual sex between a man and his wife. I can get more of those if you like.

      Georgia’s Sodomy Law

      Georgia code section 16-6-2 provides a 1 to 20 year mandatory sentence for any adults consenting to “any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another”. Married couples are not excluded from this law. The Supreme Court upheld a constitutional challenge to the sodomy law Bowers v. Hardwich (1986), saying that the Constitution did not grant the right to engage in sodomy. Presumably few consensual behaviors by or between adults are specifically enumerated by the constitution and therefore could be subject to laws prohibiting them and imposing penalties for them at any time.

      For the purposes of comparing the severity of Georgia’s opposition to these sorts of consensual acts between adults, Georgia provides less extreme penalties for sexual acts such as bestiality (16-6-6) and necrophilia (16-6-7) which provide one to five year and one to ten year sentences respectively.

      Georgia law section 16-6-15 prohibits the solicitation of sodomy and imposes up to a 12 month sentence and $1,000.00 fine if someone is determined to be guilty of soliciting an adult. For the purposes of obtaining a conviction, the Georgia court has determined that the term “blow job” is not too vague a term to support the conviction of soliciting for sodomy. [Anderson v. State, 142 Ga. App. 282, 235 S.E.2d 675 (1977)]

      Masturbation for hire is also made illegal and is subject to a sentence of up to 12 months and up to a $1,000 fine.

      Georgia also outlaws consensual sexual intercourse between unmarried persons with section 16-6-18, Fornication. The penalty provided under this section is a sentence of up to 12 months and up to a $1,000 fine.

      Just like Georgia uses those when they so deem fit so does Dominica especially when people try to embarass our country. You all are some kind of people I tell you. Always right no matter if proven otherwise…smh… anyways goodnight folks.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry
      Larry

      the dude is looking directly at the camera…it ain’t art and it ain’t hot. it is just dumb really dumb. zero sympathy

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      30 more posts? How conservative and puritan gays are these days makes me want to vomit. Who gets harmed in some couple having sex on a balcony on a ship?

      What will it do the precious childrens, can someone tell me? Will they become gay too? This is like reading the comments at Fox News or some other garbage site.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Terry
      Terry [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Andy: Indeed. While we know that most “so-called” Christians don’t make the least effort to understand what the “teachings of Christ” really are, and ironically, the most judgmental and vengeful people in America are those that call themselves Christians; –> I’m really worried to see that the title of “most judgmental group” could probably be awarded to gay bitchy queens from only this example thread of comments (and it’s one of many).

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • del
      del

      When in a foreign country you obey their laws. Plan and simple….when traveling in U.S. laws differ state to state same rules apply.. I travel a lot and I know how to act in public…..

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 97 · Michael wrote, “@B: Naked/Sex = indecent exposure.”

      Wrong. You don’t even know the definitions of the words you are trying to use.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indecent_exposure :

      “Indecent exposure is the deliberate exposure in public or in view of the general public by a person of a portion or portions of his or her body, in circumstances where the exposure is contrary to local moral or other standards of appropriate behavior. Indecent exposure laws vary in different countries. It ranges from including the genital areas, buttocks and female nipples. In some ultra-conservative jurisdictions the exposure of any part of the female body is considered indecent. Some countries do not have indecent exposure laws.

      “The applicable standard of decency is generally that of the local community, which is sometimes codified in law, but may also be based in religion, morality, or, in some justifications, on the basis of “necessary to public order.”[1] Indecent exposure sometimes refers to exhibitionism or to nudity in public and does not require any other sexual act to be performed. If sexual acts are performed, with or without an element of nudity, this can be considered public indecency, which may be a more serious criminal offense. In some countries, exposure of the body in breach of community standards of modesty is also considered to be public indecency.”

      The question is whether these two were merely naked on a balcony or having sex on the balcony. The penalties for each are in general different. The picture, contrary to assumptions, does not prove that anal intercourse had occurred on the balcony – they could be simply hugging after having “done it” in their cabin. It’s also possible, although not as likely, that they were just hugging.

      Bottom line – don’t read more into some data than the data actually show.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @David: And they still retain the criminalization statues on their books, even thought the UN, the Commonwealth, and dozens of human rights groups have asked them to repeal it. They are in violation of the statement they signed.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @DAlady: But unlike in Atlantis ports like Dominica, Grenada, and Barbados, sodomy in private is legal in Georgia. By the way, Grenada (an Atlantis stop this year) arrested two men for consensual sex in private between two consenting males above the age of consent.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 134 · DAlady wrote, ‘@pickles [another person] said: “It will be a cold day in hell before I take the side of a country that outlaws sex between two consenting, adult men.” why don’t you worry about existing laws in the US that outlaw consensual sex between a man and his wife. I can get more of those if you like.
      Georgia’s Sodomy Law
      Georgia code section 16-6-2 provides a 1 to 20 year mandatory sentence for any adults consenting to “any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another”.’

      LOL. Georgia’s infamous sodomy law was thrown out by the Georgia Supreme Court in 1998.
      Citation: http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/usa/georgia/ganews21.htm .

      I’d also suggest DAlady review the U.S. Supreme Court decision Lawrence versus Texus.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas : “Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003),[1] is a landmark United States Supreme Court case. In the 6-3 ruling, the Court struck down the sodomy law in Texas and, by proxy, invalidated sodomy laws in the thirteen other states where still existed, thereby making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory.” The first link above indicates that Lawrence and his partner had to pay a fine of $125 each, which they did but they also filed an appeal.

      Hint: just because you find some random statement on some random web site does not mean the statement is accurate.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @i was on the cruise: LOL. I’ve seen evidence about the fact that they were having sex. I challenged and they produced evidence. Those guys are idiots. See how easy that was. Gee, I wonder when Atlantis will admit that discrimination against LGBT persons in Russia, Dominica, Grenada, and Barbados is a real problem…..

      But…

      That doesn’t excuse Atlantis practice of supporting anti-Gay with cash countries like Grenada, Barbados, Russia, and Dominica. Countries that criminalize being Gay, or who deny the basic freedoms of freedom of speech, petition, protest, due process, assembly, expression, or protest. Or Atlantis’ dismissial and shocking disregard for the reality of LGBT discrimination as applied to locals in the nations they visit.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Elmwood Mac
      Elmwood Mac

      Bingo!! Those two lyin’ pieces of shite!! Let’s hear them try to explain this away.
      Looks like Daddy was tryin’ to sink the bismark.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      To the Dominican Islanders on here. Please understand…I’m glad you finally signed the UN declaration. But if you anti-Gay law is never to be enforced, and the UN, and the British Commonwealth, along with many of your economic/tourism partners want you to repeal this law, then why keep it?

      I’ll give an example about how this law can be enforced, so that you can understand why I’m so pee’d off about these laws. It involves a case in Grenada, this year (Also an Atlantis destination this year). A 41 year old man was having consensual sex with a 17 year old. The age of consent for males is 16 in Grenada. People on the island were livid about this 41 year old man, although it would have elicited much less anger had it been a 17 year old female. The police in Grenada couldn’t charge the 41 year old with any crime, because both partners were above the age of consent. But….. WAIT…there’s a law on the books that being Gay is against the law there (just like on Dominica)…So they arrested the 41 year old for being Gay. And threw him in jail for it. And paraded him like a criminal in press of that nation.

      The 41 year old obeyed every law of that nations, save one. He is Gay. So that’s the crime he was charged with. And Grenada’s statue is identical to Dominica’s.

      Just so you understand how these laws can be used on their face.

      And after this arrest, Atlantis announced they were going to travel there. I was disgusted with that decision.

      Again, you’d do well to remove the applicability of your Gay criminalization statutes. Especially if you say you have no intention of enforcing it.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FSd
      FSd

      Oh please, they are grown adults who should know better. “OMG, the advertisement told me I could do it…”

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geno
      Geno

      Looks like fun. 2. Me. I. Would’ve watched. That. Shit. & enjoyed the show. I’m a Tad bit jelly lol nonetheless. Next time an all GAY CRUISE perhaps.! ?!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 126 · i was on the cruise wrote, “@B: Why is it so hard for you to accept the truth from cruisers who are posting here telling you what happened? There is no telephoto lens required.”

      Why is it so hard for you and some others to understand simple English? I was referring to the particular picture Queerty showed. Other pictures of the ship showed the balconies as being on upper levels. Someone near the ship would have been looking more upwards if on the dock and close enough not to need a telephoto lens, so either they were photographing it from above the dock or they were on the dock and either used a telephoto lens or enlarged the picture and then cropped it.

      It’s not a question of what “cruisers” said but what the data – i.e., the stuff in the picture – indicate, and that picture is not enough to prove that one was seeing anal intercourse. A video would have made the situation a lot clearer.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 81 · Mate wrote, “@B: It seems you living in Dominica to know what mob or not would be there! Of course it would have a mob because people would want to know who did it. We’re a small nation! Everyday by the court house have a mob of people to see what’s going on! GET A LIFE!”

      Sound like your whole island needs to “get a life”. In the town I live in, there’s a court house 2 blocks from an area with lots of restaurants and with lots of people showing up for lunch. Nobody, or at least hardly anybody, walks over to the court house to see what is going on. We have far more important things to do.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dominican
      Dominican

      @Chris: Thank you Chris.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      DAlady, this world traveler wants you and anyone else you know on Dominica that I and most of the others on this thread agree with everything you’ve posted. The behavior of these two fellas was extremely disrespectful. I can’t imagine how anyone could defend it. Maybe the “buggery” charge was an overreaction, but their behavior was indefensible by any standard.

      If this is what the people who take gay cruises are like, then I don’t want to be on a gay cruise, and not because of the laws of the destinations. I am embarrassed for them, and by them.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry
      Larry

      the problem is not with the country and their anti gay laws…these idiots would have been arrested in almost every city in the world. public sex will cause you trouble even if he was doing a woman. it is stupid and the morons on here calling people puritan fools need to get out more….watching porno in your room all day has given you a confused world view

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dominican
      Dominican

      As a straight woman who’s been advocating gay rights for years to my fellow Dominicans, these guys have no idea how damaging their little tryst have been. Dominica had been taking slow yet steady steps towards building a better relationship with the LGBT community. It already had a great relationship with Atlantis before these two idiots decided to have a public PNP on the deck.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 151 · Looked In wrote, “DAlady, this world traveler wants you and anyone else you know on Dominica that I and most of the others on this thread agree with everything you’ve posted.”

      … including DAlady’s claim that Georgia has a sodomy law when the law Georgia had was declared unconstitutional by the Georgia Supreme Court in 1998?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Pickles:
      @Andy:
      @Terry: So true. Until people learn to relax about sex there is not much chance of equality for SEXUAL MINORITIES. Dont you get it guys, its STARING YOU IN THE FACE. You want to punish people for their sex acts? Guess what so does Santorum! Wake up to the fact, and chill…

      Respect for (HOMOPHOBIC!!) foreign culture, Shannon? Ok i guess we should just respect the foreign cultures of Iran and shiite Iraq that hangs teenaged homosexuals and bludgeons EMO youth to death for “cultural” reasons??

      A shitty little homophobic country needs to be criticized for being just that.

      Sure its very poor taste, and i dont think anyone would think those guys are classy, but 10 years in prison for anal sex is medieval and primitive

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Larry: But then equality for most sexual minorities isnt really an established fact “in almost every city in the world” , is it?

      The places closest to achieving true equality are strangely also the places where you would never be arrested for public sex (you might be told to move indoors, though…). Scandinavia, Netherlands, parts of Germany maybe Britain and France

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PS
      PS

      It doesn’t matter which country it happened in. It was indecent exposure to say the least. They could have easily been charged with more than what they got.

      Had this behavior occurred in any US port (and seen by the public and police) they would have been arrested too. It’s not about being “gay” or what country you’re in. You can’t have sex in public in France, Italy, Canada, etc.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Dominican: Yes, for that those two gentlemen should be really sorry. From your perspective what would be the most useful advocacy actions to which outsiders should do?

      Here’s what going on with advocacy in the Caribbean right now.

      1) Assistance with LGBT groups in Dominica – I know that support is available to groups working to change things on the ground in other areas of the Caribbean – eg with JFLAG in Jamaica and SASOD in Guyana. You guys know how best where the needs are and the reality on the ground there. Know that if there are needs with organizational, media/PR, legal, or other technical advice, polling data, etc. there are groups that can provide that. Is there a LGBT advocacy group that exists on Dominica, such as JFLAG or SASOD?

      2) Issue advocacy on International organizations to which Dominica is a member (e.g., British Commonwealth, United Nations, etc.

      3) Pressure on critical sectors of the national economy. We don’t want to harm economies without justification, but we do wish to attempt to keep pressure on critical sectors in order to reinforce the fact that there is a link between behavior and economic decisions. Especially where that nations’ largest product/service has competition (e.g., tourism).

      4) Legal assistance. I do know that there are organizations (some of which are very well placed) providing legal assistance to local groups/individual plaintiffs challenging general anti-Gay discrimination in other areas of the Caribbean, most notably in Belize and Jamaica.

      5) Education. If few are aware that Dominica has anti-Gay laws and has an issue with anti-Gay attitudes (nowhere near as bad as on Grenada or Jamaica, but still an issue), then the whole question never gets discussed. Yes, anytime that the issue is brought up, there will be blowback, but usually that blowback provides the only opportunity to force a population that doesn’t want to address these issues to actually look at these issues. There are several organizations that provide reporting services, such as cataloging anti-gay hate crimes, legislation etc, so that what goes on in countries is not hidden.

      6) Advocacy of Asylum Status for qualified LGBT refugees. There are several organizations that openly advocate for the interests of LGBT refugees in Europe, UK, Canada, and the United States. Obviously, its not a real solution to just throw up one’s hands and say ‘just send all the gays to the USA’, but sometimes there are cases where someone’s safety is in danger. We want to ensure that those asylum claimants are supported as strongly as possible.

      7) Advocacy of greater pressure by our Foreign Ministries. Sure, there’s always some blow back when the US State Department or the UK Foreign Ministry asks for another country (especially a poorer country, or a former colony), but we still feel that ensuring that governments (especially those that recieve a lot of foreign aid and import preferences) publically make their views known. Understand that part of this pressure is for the benefit of the LGBT communities in those nations. LGBT people in the US, for example, are stakeholders of the US State department and we have an interest in ensuring our own nations represent our interests, which include decriminalization and non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Obviously, we want to concentrate on the worst abuses.

      What can we do to assist you in your struggle? Foreign activists cannot be in the local conversations on the island as we aren’t part of the culture. Your work is the most useful. We try to do what we can, but if you know of anyone wanting to take a more prominent role on the island, know that there are resouces available if that outside help is desired.

      I agree, the behavior of Mr Hart and his boyfriend were outrageous and extremely counterproductive. That is really unfortunate.

      Also, please understand that while we are willing to help, many of us have our own ideas of what we are willing to do or not do. I, for example, don’t feel that spending money in Dominica so long as it has that ridiculous law on the books is a good idea. Its not a Dominica thing. Its not a developing world thing (I’m much more harsh on Russia). Its a ‘this country clings to its’ anti-gay laws’ thing. You may disagree.

      Again thanks for your help in this matter. I do understand that while much of Dominican society holds anti-Gay attitudes, there are a few that are helping out. Thanks.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nate
      Nate

      @Pickles:
      “Children are not scared by seeing people having sex. It happens all the time and no one is any worse for it” I see the pedos have come out to play!!! I do hope you have no kids under your care, I can just see you running your porn during birthday parties & homework time.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @B: I’m furious with Atlantis for going to Dominica, Grenada, Barbados and Russia yet I feel that the evidence provided by the photo is pretty conclusive. I think we need to stop defending the actions of the two men on the balcony and move towards the larger issue of the patronage of countries that cling to anti-Gay laws. We asked for a photo, and a photo was provided. We shall see if the two men challenge the veracity of the photo (and they’d have to provide some pretty compelling evidence to convince me of this). You’re free to disagree, but that’s my $0.02.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      This is not a gay oppression story. This is not even a gay story. This is just a story about two people being given a very ordinary fine for public exposure/indecency. Anybody arguing that ‘people need to be less uptight about the public seeing couples of any kid dogging on balconies, in parks or in windows’ should take a trip either into the Babylonian future that I hope awaits us, or to a Babylonian past long gone. It’s not currently smiled on to have sex where commuters and their children can see you. I’ve seen people screwing all over and, even in parks, they tend to slip behind trees and bushes. The few times I’ve seen people having sex in public, like : ON DISPLAY in an urban environment, they where either being paid for it or it was late in the day at a very specific kind of festival where children are not allowed to attend. This is not a story. These two PEOPLE got treated just like anybody else would have been and THAT is the essence of equality before the law.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D Muir
      D Muir

      @ Shannon1981

      Some of the responders here are being disingenuous. Having experienced one Atlantis cruise I can tell you that Atlantis offers a “dick deck” where both oral and “buggery” sex acts are performed by random strangers in full view of any passenger who accidentally takes an evening stroll on the wrong deck of the ship. Moreover, shipboard complaints by Atlantic guests who object to the aforementioned “buggery” and public indecency (including those acts on adjacent or lower balconies) are ignored and dismissed. Furthermore, Atlantis does not advise unsuspecting new passengers about the “dick deck”. I believe that Rich Campbell and Atlantis Events bear some of the responsibility here. Indeed, Rich may try to blow-off (pun intended) responsibility in shifting the blame to the passengers (and they are certainly responsible for their actions) but it is Atlantis that creates the highly sexualized atmosphere by allocating entire decks for “buggery” and therefore encouraging and essentially promoting the aforementioned behavior. No, it isn’t “anything goes” everywhere but it is definitely “anything goes” on the dick deck and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar. Atlantis Events explicitly sexual gay cruises (and you kid yourself to think of them as anything less than a huge circuit party on the high seas) recently include a huge drug-bust, “buggery” charges and the resulting indecent exposure convictions (that Rich equates to a “Ticket”), and even a suicide. These are all the result of a business model that puts the all-mighty dollar ahead of the welfare of ALL cruise passengers. There are standards of decency laws for everyone, gay or straight… unless you travel with Atlantis.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Charlie: But the question then remains, is that law a sensible one that punishes people for sex acts (with 10 years prison sentences, death or whatever)?

      True people should not fuck in public or be indecent, but they shouldnt lie, cheat on their spouses, let down their children etc etc. This is bad behaviour that is frowned upon and make you unpopular, but its not police business like that.

      Its not just a question of equality before the law, its about moving society ahead towards tolerance, and witchhunting, which looks like a really popular passtime here, isnt helping the gay equality cause.

      You say they are gross they should go to prison, well other people think the same of you and your sex acts

      @Nate: You are so sad. You must be so scared inside since you feel the need to demonize people.
      Guess what, children have a sexuality too. Does that shock you? Sexuality doesnt just appear when you turn 15 or 18 or 21. But adults dont have sex with children, and i really dont see anyone suggesting the contrary here except you

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George
      George

      This story was carried by alot of major outlets, I do hope they carry this major correction. I have to say though, that this is typical American behaviour. I spent 20 years in hospitality in 3 different countries (Portugal, New Zealand and Bahamas) & without exception we cringed when the Americans arrived!

      I could tell dozens of stories about how obnoxious, ignorant, loud, self-entitled & just tacky they were. They seemed to think their nationality entitled them to special treatment. Anyone in this industry, anywhere in the world literally has dozens of the American tourist horror stories. I remember this one guy actually cutting ahead of a couple checking in to say “can I just come through. I’m an American”. No fucking kidding!

      And the law breaking?? Off the scale with Americans. The majority of indecent behaviour, drug possession, public intoxication, public disturbance etc etc charges I dealt with regard Americans even though we always had more Europeans visitors. I may have overlooked it if they were the biggest spenders but they never were. That was usually the Asian & European tourists. So yeah this story for me is just another example of why American borders should just be sealed. No one goes in & for goodness sake no one leaves. Stay there!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mimi
      Mimi

      @Martin: Sandusky, is that you? Why are the NAMBLA perverts suddenly crawling out their putrid holes of shame and can they please crawl back in!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      Nate: porn is not sex. And the pedophile argument is overheated. But most people would prefer to have some control over the way their children get introduced to sex. I wouldn’t want my little gay son to start understanding sex by watching two paid bears in leather growling obscenities at each other and drinking each others’ piss. That IS one kind of sex but let’s just get the idea that it’s a happy, healthy expression of love for two people who are connected out of the way before all the less vanilla elements have to be dealt with. Kids should not be introduced to the idea that sex is a away of asserting POWER over others: that’s the really hard, nasty thing to explain. The cruelty and domination and self-aggrandizement.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mimi
      Mimi

      @George: I worked for a short period on an Australian cruise in my early twenties and sadly you are right. Americans behave badly. The service industry detests us in no small measure and we deserve the contempt from what I witnessed. POOR ambassadors

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      They didn’t GET a ten year sentence (like the lady in Dubai who had sex with her boyfriend on the beach – the HETEROSEXUAL lady look it up) They got a FINE approximately as large a a few parking tickets in a major US city.

      The ten-year law may be homophobic and Draconian but it is NOT being enforced. Such laws existed and DO exist, unenforced, all over the USA and Europe.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mimi
      Mimi

      @Charlie: See comment 165 and go away. “porn is not sex” indeed!!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      including DAlady’s claim that Georgia has a sodomy law when the law Georgia had was declared unconstitutional by the Georgia Supreme Court in 1998?

      It’s irrelevant. What matters here is that two American jerks committed what, even in the most liberal jurisdictions in the U.S., would be a criminal offense. They compounded their offense by turning it into a gay rights crusade. It has nothing to do with gay rights whatsoever. It was a case of gross public indecency, and there’s no defense whatsoever.

      I’ve got the means to take cruises, gay or otherwise, and have thought about a gay one. I’ve (well, my partner and me) decided against it, figuring that they’d probably be noisy, and full of drunks, drugs, and a level of sexual displays that we’re not into. Trust me, this whole thing doesn’t make me think less of Dominica, but it sure seals the deal with respect to considering a gay cruise.

      I hope the people of Dominica will realize that those two tourists were nor representative of gay Americans who might come to visit. The vast majority of us are much lower key, and far more discreet. That behavior was really embarrassing. And no, I am not some self-hating prude. I just can’t find any reason to defend getting naked and having sex on a balcony facing a crowded cruise ship dock. It’s crazy.

      I wonder if they were on drugs.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      The world’s worst tourists? Probably the Israelis. Followed by the British, the Americans and then the Germans. Hated everywhere they go. Treating people like servants, snapping fingers in restaurants, arguing over cents with the poorest of the poor, cheating, drunken vomiting, public exposure, doggling, hotel-room demolition, marching into churches and mosques in halter-tops and cut-offs, wearing their fucking wraparound designer sunglasses whilst conducting conversations and never, never, NEVER learning one goddamn word of the language: just shouting at people in their own language

      The best? The Japanese: unbeatably polite, interested, humble and friendly: both the very young and the very old.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @Looked In: The older one has a very Ketamine-y face.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @Mimi: Porn IS NOT sex, any more than movies are real life. They are a carefully edited selection of clips depicting a staged performance with a script and a director, tailored to suit a certain taste in voyeurism: whether that’s youth fantasy (Bel Ami) or muscle bears (Kristen Bjorn). It’s a media product.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @Martin: Fuck in PUBLIC: police business.

      PRIVATE ADULTERY: Not police business.

      PUBLIC

      PRIVATE

      See the connection between the police and the public sphere? You can watch porn in PRIVATE but you can’t show it in a PUBLIC school.

      Easy.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jon
      Jon

      @Charlie. Thanks. Alot of people are conviniently forgetting that the law was not enforced. Its an arcane law for sure but it is rarely if ever envoked if you read the Dominican news outlets. I think the threat to enforce was reactionary triggered by the anger & humiliation of such an in-your-face-whachya-gonna-do about it. I agree with George, the stupid American tourist mentality of “you cant touch me, I’m an American” played out here. Those same outlets say that they spent a v short period and the cells and were infact housed in an old office. They received preferential treatment from get go and still defamed that country. God they make me so angry!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @George (#164) and Mimi (#167), I’ve been to 25 countries, including a dozen trips to Europe. I haven’t seen the rampant obnoxiousness from Americans that you claim to have experienced. Maybe it exists, at least among some types of tourists. I’m almost always an independent traveler, and in my experience, the Europeans have been more commonly disrespectful in the cathedrals there.

      The Americans I’ve seen have usually tried to blend in, unlike, say, the English and the Japanese, who each in their own ways tend to stick within their own groups and communities. If there’s one mistake we do tend to make in many places it’s that we’re over-tippers, because of the U.S. custom of 15%-20%, which doesn’t translate too well in some places.

      Your anti-American generalizations strike me as a good deal over the top.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @D Muir: Why would ANYBODY book a cruise on such a ship and then complain about gay sex acts being performed on board? That’s like booking a holiday at Disneyland and then complaining about Mickey Mouse. They’d have to be the most almighty morons to do such a thing.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @Looked In: One word: Mexico.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jon
      Jon

      @Mimi: I too am uncomfortable but what seems to be commenters sexualising kids. Is one guy saying running porn for kids at a birthday party is a private matter?? However, I wanna give them benefit of the doubt and say maybe they’re not NAMBLA! Maybe they’re just really clueless people who should not be allowed to raise kids??

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Oh, and by the way, I do apologize for not knowing: Chinese, German, Swedish, Russian, French, Italian, Greek, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Czech, Spanish, Portugese, Estonian, Burmese, Finnish, Danish, Gaelic, and Dutch. Most of the time, people won’t let you use a phrase book. They come at you in English, which at this moment is the world’s second language.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Charlie, the last time I went to Mexico, it was a day trip to Tijuana. My partner wanted to go. It was before the narco war exploded. On our way back to San Diego, some guy offered me his sister. In English. I didn’t crack a smile. I said, “No thanks,” and kept walking. Cuernavaca was a lot more civilized, but now I’m reluctant to go anywhere in Mexico.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Why would ANYBODY book a cruise on such a ship and then complain about gay sex acts being performed on board?

      It’s too bad that there’s apparently no such thing as a reasonably sedate gay cruise. It really is. But I’ll take your word for it.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Charlie: What you dont UNDERSTAND is that enforcing laws against crimes against MORALITY have an unfortunate effect on gay equality BECAUSE morality is fluid and changes between populations and individuals. Many people believe being gay is immoral (“friends dont let friends use the pink balls…”)

      In italy a gay couple was fined for indecency for kissing in public. Is that fair? In Iraq they would be killed. Is that fair?

      Where do you draw the line, when according to conservative christian morality you are gross and should be punished (and will be in Hell), when you follow your natural impulse and kiss a guy?

      So should we just surrender and pack our rainbow flags inside and fly them in PRIVATE?? Gay pride events are explicit because they defend the right to show your queer sexuality in PUBLIC and not be forced into the closet.

      Stupid careless behaviour like fucking in plain public makes you unpopular, which im sure these guys feel now.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Where do you draw the line, when according to conservative christian morality you are gross and should be punished (and will be in Hell), when you follow your natural impulse and kiss a guy?

      I draw the line at getting naked and having sex in full view of a crowd of people on a cruise ship dock. To call any of this a gay rights issue is utterly ludicrous.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Jon: @Mimi: I dont usually acknowledge shit when it speaks, but in this case ill make an exception.

      Children have a sexuality like all human beings. Its a so called “pychological” fact. Psychology is a “science”. Which is too difficult a term to explain to talking shit.

      Adults have power over children and can cause harm to childrens developing sexuality which is why adults should have sex with adults and children should play and develop their sexualities with themselves.

      It is also a psychological fact that what the mind is full of, also happens to be what the mouth is talking about. So the pedo comments are entirely on you…

      Are children damaged by witnessing a sex act? Well it probably depends a lot on the reactions of the adults around around. If they start screaming, pointing, tearing out their hair and start intensive crisis therapy for the children then it probably will harm those children. If the adults shrug and say, “they were just embracing”. then it will hardly register.
      I would in these circumstances not wish for any children to be in your care.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: And other people draw it a little tighter and would have YOU hanged by the neck until death in public for being who you are.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Martin, it’s not a gay rights issue. It’s about public indecency, disrespect, gross stupidity, and probably being whacked out on some circuit party drugs.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mimi
      Mimi

      @Lookedin: Next time you travel do sit down with your waiter, hotel housekeeper, anyone in the industry really and have an honest chat. “I haven’t seen the rampant obnoxiousness from Americans that you claim to have experienced”. Perhaps because you are a traveller and not on the receiving end of the behaviour.
      On the cruise on which I worked, I found Americans to completely lack any and all self-awareness. From the couple who dropped the “I’m American” line to get afterhours kitchen service (they didnt) to the guys who when detained for drunken disorderly conduct in the phillipines asked the cops “so are you a n*gg*r or what?” And then later when we had left the port a quarrell broke out amongst guests. On the one side Americans (about 10 of them) and the other side pretty much everyone on that deck at the time. According to the Americans, since they give aid to the Fillipino gvt & that is the “AID that pays their national budget & cop salaries” Americans should have diplomatic immunity or some such shit. In other words, they should get preferrential treatment based on citizenship & their countrymen shouldnt have been detained to begin with. These were sober people over the age of 35! Later listening to more exprienced staff tell their stories of dealing with Americans, it was clear to me that there is most definately a problem! An attitude problem. I stand with George, these morons fucking are probably operating on that dumb American mentality. FYI Japanese tourists are without a doubt the most respectful. I loved them! Where did you hear otherwise?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: It became a gay rights issue when everyone lost their head and started to moralise and praise the punishment of moral crimes.

      Gays have been persecuted for centuries on account of the need to preserve public morality..

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jesse Archer
      Jesse Archer

      @pickles I’m with you! I have no idea why societies great and small get so worked up over sex!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Former backpacker
      Former backpacker

      Actually a common joke amongst backpackers is be sure not to walk around with an American flag on your backpack. Partly because so many detest American foreign policy & hate America and partly because people just dont like American tourists & will rob you just based on that hate.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Texndoc
      Texndoc

      What does it say about the fact that Queerty, a gay blog I assume frequented by primarily gays, has chosen to put a black bar over the photo that some are telling us is an event took place in front of men, women, and children of a foreign country? Shouldn’t the “go back to Iran you prudes” people be slamming Queerty?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Domi
      Domi

      On role of nationality: the island was not surprised to learn that they were Americans. On some radio shows that discussed it, people said we need to not promote the country as a destination in America & focus on Europeans and China. Many dont see it as a problem with gay but American disrespect. So I agree with those who have said the same. a Dominican.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Mimi, what sort of cruise was this? I’m curious, mainly because I’m really not much of a group traveler. I’ve sailed four times, and only one sailing was a “cruise” (the others included an Atlantic crossing on the QE2, and two sailings from Washington State to Alaska on the Alaska state ferry system).

      Of the four boat trips, the “cruise” was the least appealing to me, and most like a party boat. So I wonder if maybe the kind of American who “cruises” is more likely to behave badly, sort of like soccer games in Europe bring out the worst in a lot of the Europeans. In my travels, which are extensive but (as I’ve mentioned) mostly independent, I just haven’t seen the tendency you cite. I’ve seen bad behavior, but it’s been spread randomly enough that I couldn’t attribute it to any particular nationality.

      @Former backpacker, a lot of backpackers are hipsters who congregate with other hipsters, and in that crowd there’s been a fashionable anti-Americanism ever since the Vietnam era. American tourists, especially those who are younger and less experienced, tend to be pretty trusting, and make great victims.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Continuum
      Continuum

      The two guys are idiots for fucking in public, whether straight or gay. They were in the wrong.

      But, Atlantis is still in the wrong. Why are the spending gay tourist dollars in countries with homophobic laws. There are plenty of Caribbean nations which treat gays with legal dignity.

      Additionally, Atlantis is in the wrong again. Why are they sailing to St Petersburg, Russia with its blatant anti-gay, homophobic government. Why are we spending gay dollars to boost the economy of gay haters.

      Two wrongs don’t make a right.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Domi, if people there think it’ll be better with the Chinese, well, you’d better be careful what you wish for. They’re not going to be screwing on the ship balconies, but in my traveling experience the Chinese set new standards for pushiness, often quite literally. Be prepared! That much said, it could very well be that the whole Carribean cruise atmosphere, gay or straight, encourages obnoxiousness.

      My partner went on a non-gay Carribean cruise with his ex-partner and family, and he said that after a while, there was nothing to do but get drunk. All the ports were the same, right down to the steel drums and jewelry shops and grinding poverty. He said once was enough. I can imagine that there’s some pretty bad actors on those things.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeE
      MikeE

      @Looked In: Americans are “over tippers”???? ROFLMAO You obviously have never worked in the service industry and had to serve American tourists. They are renowned worldwide as the worst tippers.

      I’ve seen a gay guy walk up to a bartender in a gay bar, order a round for himself and group of friends, and leave a NICKEL on the counter for the barman. And I’ve seen this sort of thing multiple times.

      When Americans travel, they are self-righteous and self-important, demanding and difficult, loud and obnoxious. When Americans are present, EVERYONE knows that they are there… because the Americans make sure that everyone knows.

      There are so many things to admire about the U.S., but American “exports” (ie: tourists) isn’t one of them.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      The generalizations about “obnoxious” American tourists remind me of the stereotype of the “rude” French. I’ve been to France four times, and it’s true that when the French are rude, they are memorably rude, but it’s even truer that the French are also some of the most gracious people, especially if you learn a few customs.

      I can imagine that Americans might not have a very good reputation in the Carribean, and certainly in parts of Mexico. I think there’s a lot of self-selection. I don’t go to the places where Americans tend to be at their worst, including theme parks in this country.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      You obviously have never worked in the service industry and had to serve American tourists. They are renowned worldwide as the worst tippers.

      That’s not what I was told in Seville. The maitre d followed me out of the restaurant and returned half the tip I’d left. The guidebook had suggested 5%, because service is typically included in European tabs, so that’s exactly what I left. “Americans always leave too much!” he said. I’ve heard the same elsewhere.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bigg
      Bigg

      So, I’ve read all the comments here so far. What do I hear? A lot of squabbling that doesn’t change the main two facts: 1. These men were wrong to perform a public sex act where it wasn’t welcome – period. 2. Atlantis Cruise Lines should obviously shoulder some of the blame for creating this situation in the first place, and Dominica is no place for free gay people to be spending their money.
      For me, the second is still the important take-away message. It seems like most of the commenters here – whether truthful or not – would not perform the same public act. However, all of you are still just as vulnerable to anti-gay treatment abroad even if you’re as quiet and respectful as church mice.
      My solution? Don’t travel to countries with a less than stellar LGBT rights record. Reward those who are doing right, don’t reward those who aren’t.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      By the way, MikeE, what country other than the U.S. and Canada has nickels? Where is it that you live?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mimi
      Mimi

      @lookedin; Although I find that as I travel I may be slightly more attuned to the behaviour of fellow travellers than the average tourist who hasnt worked in the industry, the truth is when I travel I more focussed on my own experience and dont notice the things that used to drive us insane about tourists. Thats why I urge you to speak to some staff and even locals if you really wanna know why Americans have such a bad reputation. There some really appalling “war stories” out there. Not discounting your experience just suggesting that you would be unlikely to know how bad it gets being just the guest. As Domi says, the first question when you hear some stories is “were they American?” followed by “that figures”.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Matthew
      Matthew

      I don’t see what they did was a crime. Sex between consenting adults should never be criminalized. I still call for the boycott of any and all anti gay countries. Dominica has laws against being gay we shouldn’t be going there period. If this had been a hetero couple they would have been warned and never been arrested.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • NYC Hugh
      NYC Hugh

      @Matthew: OH PLEASE. The crime is that they had public sex not more than 75 yards from the end of the dock, which was populated by lots of other cruisers boarding excursions, locals selling trinkets, police, taxi drivers, AND a small church group who had planned a protest. The public sex act (out in the open air, with the sun shining on that side of the boat at that time of the morning) was enough to incite the local crowd, who demanded that the police do something. Again – they were not arrested for having sex in the privacy of their cabin – they were arrested for having sex in very public view of lots of people (including children). Not a smart thing.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George
      George

      @lookedin: Like MikeE I was surprised to hear you say that Americans are the best tippers. In my experience Americans are actually average tippers. Guests from Hongkong on the other hand…always a windfall! I dont know why that is though.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Christopher
      Christopher

      @DAlady: I think you have said everything in your first line. “even against its own laws”. The problem many of us have is that we feel that gay dollars shouldn’t be pumped into a country where it is illegal to be gay. You really cant change the fact that the buggery laws are still on the books, regardless of people’s attitudes. Some simple research will show that local lawmakers and preachers have been trying to deny access to the island by gay cruises for years now. and there have been incidents of verbal harassment by locals.

      While these guys may have done something stupid. That doesn’t change the question as to why Atlantis is docking there. When booking a gay cruise, a passenger may assume that Atlantis has done its job and chosen appropriate ports. Dominica, with it’s buggery laws, is not an appropriate port for a gay cruise, period.

      There are two separate issues here. This issue has brought about a discussion of Atlantis Events choosing anti gays ports, and repots have surfaced of previous problems that were ignored by Atlantis. So there are legitimate questions here, and Atlantis should answer them in a less dismissive fashion, and if this forces them to search out more gay friendly ports, then that’s a good thing.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      These two guys got off easy, had this been in any city in the US they would have gotten jail time. The NYPD would have done worse or they would have been caught in one of Mayor Bloomberg’s sting operations. The Dominican authorities were being nice to these liars.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mecorrea1970
      mecorrea1970

      @JP: Well said I agree with you totally

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JPSD
      JPSD

      Public sex is for trashy people, gay or straight. What if someone walks by with their kids? It’s gross.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Proud Dominican
      Proud Dominican

      @DALady.. you could not have said it any better! set the record straight. i love you girl. thanks alot

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Frank
      Frank

      I find it hard to get beyond the shabbiness of the balcony. Is it just the photo? RC balconies were much nicer. And these two are f-ing idiots. Stop doing this shit. You know the public dwells on the negative and since we are still battling for equality we need to concede a bit. After the concession, we played the game, then we mainstream and become boring like everyone else. Yeah.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dominican
      dominican

      @Houston Bill:

      we are INDEPENDENT country we make and amend our own laws who dont like it? LUMP IT!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @B:

      oh for fuck sake. You’re being deiblerately dense and obtuse. The two guys’ cabin was on DECK 5 of the ship. Its not that high up from the waterline of the ship. The ship has 12 decks. The picture is an accurate depiction of the angle from the end of the pier. Having been there, my guess is the picture was taken from somewhere on the middle of the pier. And, if that’s the case it was taken by a passenger or perhaps a Celebrity crew member.

      What’s more important here is why you cannot accept the personal accounts of dozens’ of people who knew exactly what happened? Why did you need photographic evidence? Do you realize that releasing this photo puts these two individuals at risk? They were charged with indecent exposure. They told the judge they were not having sex on the balcony. Dominica has an extradition treaty with the Unitied States. If this or more pictures/video are released clearly showing they lied to a judge and the judge wants to now press more serious charges, they could be returned to Dominica. Why??? Because assholes like you demanded further evidence. What a selfish prick of a queen you are. You care so much about what happened to these two guys and the hell they went through on Dominica, yet, you yourself put them in further jeopardy. And now you want to see video! FOR FUCK SAKE.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Frank
      Frank

      @dominican: just out of curiosity, why are you on this post?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DJ
      DJ

      I enjoyed Atlantis cruises to Egypt, Turkey, and St. Petersburg – places with many gay-friendly people, but maybe not gay-friendly laws. We were told to respect their culture, and thousands of us had no problem agreeing to do so. We were met by friendly people who were aware of us. We were not there as activists, but perhaps we changed some minds by showing respect. If you want to travel only to places that don’t discriminate against gays, lock yourself at home and stay off Atlantis cruises. Even gay-friendly countries, INCLUDING THE US, don’t tolerate public sex.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ousslander:

      right on.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jose
      jose

      @blakjaxx: thank you, so why not dont do it in america and go to someone elses place and do that foolishness…..got what they deserved

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • xchamp
      xchamp

      The only thing I will say is: From a human rights issue they should be treated the same as a hetero couple, however they VISITORS to another country and they do not get to make the RULES. That being said: come-on that looks like least possible attempt at discreteness. Sucks to be them… I am not sticking my neck out for them.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jose
      jose

      @thick: @ think i can see ure from the islands esp. DA….lol…like the language

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Grant
      Grant

      This picture broke through Queerty which makes me think it must have been submitted by someone who was also a guest on that boat and gay. Whomever submitted this photo to Queerty should be ashamed of themselves.

      Sure, these guys did a risky (others say wildly stupid) thing to be funny/ make a point but they certainly have paid dearly, and the press on them will be there forever. I even get that they denied having sex because the press surrounding this was really about slandering them and the sensationalizing the gay community overall as oversexed perverts who can’t control themselves. Rather, this was a joking/ rebellious/ poorly conceived political statement that went wildly amok.

      But for someone to submit this to Queerty and not consider how this further personally damages these guys (unnecessarily) and the gay community overall is hateful and destructive. To that person, It must have felt wildly powerful to have this on your camera, something that hundreds of media outlets and thousands of people wanted to see. Although your piece of evidence has gotten closer to the truth as to what happened on that balcony, as a social tool it will prove far more damaging to the gay community than anything theses guys every did.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ps guy 2012
      Ps guy 2012

      Idiots! And here I felt bad for them. They need to understand how awful they look by stating how they were just innocent victims. Typical druggy gay trash.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @DAlady They’re right that the Georgia law has been done away with. But in states like Kansas it exists per cited article http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/21/us/sodomy-law-remains-official-in-kansas.html

      I believe many can attack what Dalady is saying because you can prove her wrong on such a detail, instead of looking at the broader message of her post.

      In the days of the Civil Rights movement MLK and the others would have loved an opportunity such as the one provided by Dominica. They would this as a step forward to visit an area even with the many laws against being black in white communities and be able to mingle with the people there. Talk with them and show them that being black isn’t some crime or bad offense. That we are all humans and are entitled to respect and love. There’s a divisiveness going on within the LGBT community.

      “Even with the law on the books” they allowed the ship in port and that says alot! MLK had sit ins and protested in away that respected the views of the people who thought less of blacks. You didn’t see this man just totally abuse the power that he had by having sex at restaurants, hotels or the people who worked alongside him doing such a thing.

      I’m not saying these men came to Dominica to protest but the point is this was an opportunity to show some respect and gradually create the process of change on the island. This was the opportunity to not only do well in Dominica but to spread the change throughout the Caribbean.

      You guys don’t have to tell us about Grenada because we already know and are aware. Personally I think 17 year old with a 41 year old is disgusting just as it would be disgusting a 17yr girl with a 41 year old man. There teachers all across the United States getting arrested for having sex with 17 year olds because its just wrong! Cited articles below
      Cite: http://laist.com/2012/02/29/lausd_high_school_band_teacher_arre.php
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/16/lauren-redfern-high-schoo_n_1283779.html
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2092858/Teacher-Bethyl-Shepherd-sex-student-oral-sex-6-jailed.html

      The people on here claiming children like to watch sex or children aren’t affected by watching adults in action are nothing but pervs. That’s absolute pervertedness and boarderline phedophilia thinking.

      Remember we’re Dominicans, its our country. We have the right to do what we want within the confines of our laws. If you’re a visitor, you’re subjected to our laws and local norms.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Troy
      Troy

      They should of locked them up. Doing that outside is wrong, they now it was wrong and thats why they did it. I could of under stould, if they would of been at home in your back yard or camping. But on a cruise, come on guys. Yall make it look bad for other gays out there big time.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @grant:

      They shouldn’t be ashamed. The gay or lesbians who submitted this are trying to correct a wrong. They came to a country that they enjoyed and had fun in. This country didn’t deserved to be defamed in such a way. It’s appalling what they’ve done to my country but we are tough and resilient people. Even our gay people on the island took the personal attacks by Americans seriously. Your media didn’t even bother to interview any of our local government officials and they went on to publish stories without all the facts. I’ve allows though that fabrication of stories by the so called “elite” US news networks was a daily norm and here they proved me right. It took queerty a blog which many so called “elite” US news agnecy in America would snob their nose at to post and correct this wrong. I feel very happy that even within this bad fiasco that members of the lgbt community had the courage to do this. Thank you to the person or persons who did the right thing.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • I was also there
      I was also there

      @Grant: I am so very GLAD that someone did submit these pics. I watched with dismay as the Island was smeared and slandered on this and other boards. It wasnt just an attack on the arcane laws, people called us liars. Then there were the vicious attacks drenched in xenophobia, racism, sexism & classism, because apparently poor, black women “dont know what gay sex looks like”. So yes, its nice to be able to say “told you so”.

      For the record, I took an excursion into town and the people were lovely. They knew what ship were on and my sexuality is pretty obvious. 4 hours later these same people were being subjected to all manner of abuse on various internet boards on account of these stupid liars. I hate them so much.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Frederick
      Frederick

      If a straight couple did the same thing, the situation would probably be handled in the same manner by the authorities in Dominica. What these two guys did was plain stupid…

      Mar 31, 2012 at 12:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RichB in PS
      RichB in PS

      Am sure they are or will be hailed as local Palm Springs heros but publically shamed elsewhere.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Matthew
      Matthew

      @NYC Hugh: The point is that sex between consenting adults no matter where that occurs should not be illegal at all. If they want to have sex in the middle of main street they should have the right to do so. period!!!! This all beside the point Dominica and countries like them are anti gay I suspect that even the simple act of holding hands, kissing or other PDA’s in Dominica would have resulted in the same treatment.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wilmer
      Wilmer

      They should have been horse whipped

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Matthew
      Matthew

      @Sari Sari: The act that they were arrested for gay sex means that your country is anti gay period. The fact that the couple was subjected to a mob that, if the police had not stopped them, the mob would have lynched the two men, means your country is anti gay. If the truth hurts then too bad.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      But for someone to submit this to Queerty and not consider how this further personally damages these guys (unnecessarily) and the gay community overall is hateful and destructive.

      Other way around. John Hart and Dennis Mayer were selfish, immature, and destructive. I applaud the person who gave Queerty the picture, and applaud Queerty for publishing it. As for Hart and Mayer, do us all a favor and stay home from now on.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sansacro
      Sansacro

      Speak for yourself: I think seeing public sex is hot, str8 or gay, guys or girls. But when you play outside the rules, you gotta brace yourself for the consequences. (Of course, that’s what makes it so hot.)

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Sari Sari: “its our country. We have the right to do what we want within the confines of our laws”. I guess HITLER WOULD HAVE SAID THE SAME FOR THE JEWS. “Its our country, we have laws that say they should be gassed. Its our country!!

      You are pathetic and it seems well deserved that many caribbean states are squalid little mudholes. Your societies are so backward it almost hurts to look at.

      We in western europe are ages ahead of you in tolerance and quality of living as well as science and culture. Dont worry i wouldnt ever want to visit your cesspool of a country.
      People dont usually fuck in public in Scandinavia, but if they did we would carry on with our lives. We have a long history of sexual freedom here to the benefit of all.

      But dont let us disturb you in your persecution of your countrymen who happen to be gay. And by all means look under the blankets to check if 17 YO sleeps with 41 YO

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW
      KyleW

      I said it all along. These two assholes have been playing up to gay solidarity, and they made a lot of apologists look like idiots. Maybe now people will learn to engage their brains before their mouths.

      And Matthew, I really have to disagree with you. Two consenting adults should be able to have sex anytime anywhere? Statements like that (and moronic actions such as the ones this story is about) are why people think that gays are all depraved.

      The sex act, let alone sexuality, is one of the most private acts of most adults on this planet, and whilst I concede that that may well be down to global religious-inspired prudery, I see no reason why those who choose not to (and especially their kids) see a live porn show should be subjected to it. What are you, a dog in heat that can’t resist fucking anywhere, any time the urge takes you?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @matthew lets not get out of hand here. lynched? my country never lynched anybody unlike yours. European colonizes lynched my people but country Dominica never lynched anybody based on their sexuality. The mob? Like you’re an expert on Dominicans? I ‘m from Dominica and have lived in the States and I can speak about both sides. Can you? Lastly, if they were going to lynch them for being gay how could so many of the other gay men on the island during this fiasco had no problems getting back on the boat or wondering through the city? The United States need to handle people like you who dirty it’s name, who bring your people shame by your opinions that have no experience as a basis for your argument. They deserved the embarassment they recieved for disrespecting my people so boldly.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Texndoc
      Texndoc

      Now if THIS wasn’t written by one of those two douches, then I woke up a MEGA millions lottery winner.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      I don’t generally agree with limiting travel to only the most gay-friendly destinations, and shunning the rest, with the laws formally on the books being the criterion for what constitutes anti-gay. If I did that, I’d never have gone to China, Russia, Estonia, Hungary, or Burma, or to the 26 American states that banned sodomy before the Supreme Court invalidated those laws.

      And if I limited my travel to those destinations where it’s socially and legally acceptable to have gay sex in public, outdoors in mid-day, on a crowded pier, in full view of hundreds of onlookers including children, I don’t think I’d be doing much traveling at all.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Texndoc
      Texndoc

      Whoops, was referring to this:
      But for someone to submit this to Queerty and not consider how this further personally damages these guys (unnecessarily) and the gay community overall is hateful and destructive.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jim
      jim

      i would spit in the face of both of these jerks….
      except i would turn them on…
      they should still be in jail…

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kawneekwa
      kawneekwa

      Yuggity yuggity. You no dey loved in in the jail too!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael Equality McKeon
      Michael Equality McKeon

      These men did a very stupid thing. Yes, the horrible Caribbeans could have handled the situation a little better but these guys would have been arrested in Los Angeles or New York.

      Why we as LGBT would spend money in the intensely homophobic Caribbean is beyond me, there are so many more beautiful places in the world where the people aren’t as hateful.

      Any way, I don’t think that one can argue the “WHY” in the equation.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @Martin

      Whilst reviewing huffington post I found another scandanivian with identical comments like yours. MMMM…”Linda Stare” ring a bell? You are such an evil person for going from blog to blog acting like you care about gay rights. You hate Dominicans for some reason. Off, course Europe is years ahead of the Caribbean. I would be rich to if I’d brought diseases that kill thousands of indigenous people, If I’d wired hate within societie under slavery and all kinds of torture to the rest of the world. I’d also be rich to if stole other countries gold and forced slaves to work of land that didn’t belong to me.

      I love my mudhole martin or linda who ever you are. I love it. The best mud in Dominica is on the northeast. It’s clay type and orange. When I get off from the airport after being away for so long I stick my foot right into that mud! You can’t say anything to me that others haven’t. Dominicans don’t care about hateful people you! I bet you won’t come to Roseau or go grandbay with that big mouth of yours. Why don’t you come and tell to a Dominican in their face? Please!!! Tolerance why don’t you ask all those muslims about tolerance in Europe. You hate Jewish people over there too. Please keep on moving. :))))))))))))

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Giff
      Giff

      God, 242 comments!? Can all be boiled down to: 1) Atlantis cruises to anti-LGBT countries, 2) These men were having sex in public which is illegal there and here in the US (and I would assume every country)

      I hope there is some change on both fronts, Atlantis only promotes pro-LGBT countries and these two men see the consequences of their actions (arrest, public shame, whatever).

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      @RichB in PS: @RichB in PS That’s not the correct John Hart that this is about. You should not be posting people’s personal facebook pages so they can be harrassed—remember what happened with Spike Lee. Queerty should delete your post.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ps guy 2012
      Ps guy 2012

      Im sure they’ll make a porn now. Haha

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      I believe many can attack what Dalady is saying because you can prove her wrong on such a detail, instead of looking at the broader message of her post.

      Sari Sari and others, please don’t focus on the few who are defending those drugged-out idiots. Instead, look at the totality of the commentary, both here and on other gay sites, once the full story was known. The large majority of commentary by gay people has condemned Messrs. Hart and Mayer for their foolishness, stupidity, and lack of respect, both for themselves and the people at their destination.

      In spite of some of the commentary here about inconsiderate American tourists, as an American who has traveled widely around the world, I think most American travelers are well aware of the stereotype, and take pains to avoid giving offense to locals. I suppose people see what they want to see, don’t they? I want to see all of it, both good and not so good, and then keep it in an accurate perspective.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Sari Sari: Your rant is insane. We are not even intrested in your “opinion”. Its a gay blog not a forum for haters with hurt feelings. We would never see the end of it.

      So go away and get busy with other peoples sex lives.

      Your “people”? You mean the african nations that sold off the male captives from their little tribal wars instead of killing them outright, as they were really only intrested in women and children as their own slaves. I guess thats culture.

      FYI Denmark first abolished slavery of all nations and freed its slaves. 260 years before Saudiarabia btw

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      That’s not the correct John Hart that this is about. You should not be posting people’s personal facebook pages so they can be harrassed

      I partly agree. The “John Hart” on Facebook does kinda-sorta look like the “John Hart” from the cruise, but it’s a common name and there isn’t enough information on the Facebook page to definitively establish the link.

      One thing I’d say is that, given the apparent age difference in the Queerty photos, the nature of the behavior on the dock, and the descriptions of what the guys were doing at other times on board, I am left wondering whether or not the actual “John Hart” is partners with “Dennis Mayer,” or whether “Dennis” had hired himself out for the trip.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Speaking of arrogance and haughty, self-righteous superiority, “Martin” shows us that Americans aren’t even in the same league with the Danes.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      I@Looked In: I’m a bit curious about your list. Hungary has problems with its’ new government, but they are grudgingly playing by the rules for the time being. So is Estonia. Myanmar and China treat all of its citizens like crap, not just Gay persons.

      You are free to disagree, but I draw a distinction between nations that have questionable practices, and those nations, such as Russia, Grenada, Barbados, Belize, Jamaica, Egypt, and Dominica that are engaged in laws that specifically target gay persons.

      I also avoid Exxon Gas, Chick-Fil-A becuase they are anti-Gay. For me, I’d rather not patronize anti-Gay organizations. Or organizations that funnel cash to anti-Gay countries while claiming to be part of the gay community.

      Just my $0.02.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Sari Sari: Regardless of how I might feel about a 41 year old dating a 17 year old (for the record, I think its kind of creepy), the point I was attempting to make is that what they were doing was legal, except that the people are Gay. That’s my problem. If Grenada wishes to raise its consent laws to 18, unless the oldest partner is within 15 or 10 years of the younger partner, I have no problem with that. But change the law for everyone, not just use some enabling act to arrest a Gay man for engaging in behavior that is legal for straight people.

      That’s another problem with these criminalization statutes, people say they aren’t enforced, so if someone who is Gay wants to stay within the law, how the blank are they to stay within the laws? Apparently, the 41 year old stayed within all Grenadan laws, with the exception of one, he is gay.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      @Looked In: It’s definitely not the same John Hart because he had made some comments several days ago on Atlantis Cruise site & you can see who he is. No one should post these kinds of links–look how much Spike Lee got in trouble & had to pay when he posted the incorrect address for Zimmerman. If this man, who was not on this cruise gets harassed, who knows what money is going to have to exchange hands. Queerty would be wise to remove this link.

      By the way they have friends who posted and attested to them being a couple for 17 years & Palm Beach is a very small community & if they weren’t you’d have heard by now.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      Correction: Palm Springs not Palm Beach. I think we’re reaching a tipping point of craziness & over reaction when we start posting people’s facebook pages.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Houston Bill, gay sex has been completely decriminalized in the U.S. for only 10 years, so we’re not exactly standing on a very high hill. To not travel to all of Russia, and particularly to their most liberal and outward-looking city, St. Petersburg, because of laws in the country and attitudes in parts of it, isn’t how I’d handle it.

      Now, I’m not completely passive. No way would I travel to Jamaica, for example, where it’s not just a matter of laws on the books but daily reality. There are other Carribean countries I wouldn’t visit, along with parts of Africa, because of how they treat gay people. But I would not exclude Dominica because they have a colonial era law on their books, and charged people with indecent exposure for indecently exposing themselves.

      If you want to find a cause celebre for gay people, that arrest in Dominica isn’t a good candidate. Those two idiots got exactly what they deserved. I have no sympathy whatsoever for them.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Sam, you’ve fully convinced me. Just for the record, I hope you noticed that I wasn’t exactly enthused about the posting of the Facebook page to begin with. But yes, I agree with you that it was entirely wrong.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: 1, I see no reason to give concessions to homophobes or haters of any kind. 2, i have pointed to the dangerous slippery slope of punishing crimes against public morality, because that was the exact argument which was behind centuries of persecution of gay people in the past in Europe and in the present in many countries today.

      The relationship between relaxed attitude to sexuality and gay rights is clear shown on the map by the correlation between the two, it is even evident on a US map with Alabama and Georgia not being beacons of either. If american gays want to have more equality and more rights, perhaps the best way isnt going on a moralistic crusade and demand jail for public nudity.

      I dont care if idiots call me names but i dont feel obliged to be civil

      Tolerance begins in yourself

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @dominican: Yes, Dominica is an independent country. But, just as you may criticize America and its laws, we have that same right. You’d do well to understand that.

      Also, we, along with the British, the Canadians, and the EU, provide development aid (e.g., paid with taxes that come, partly, from Gay taxpayers), import preferences, access to our employment market (e.g., visas which result in remittances to your nation from our nations), and we support your nation financially with tourism (which is a service to which there are many substitutes for Dominica), etc. You do well to understand that we are also independent and have the right to continue patronizing and or subsidizing your economy.

      We intend to make Dominica and other nations own its’ retention of these criminalization statutes. Most Americans remain unaware that the Caribbean continues to criminalize Gay behavior. No longer will Dominica and others ‘remain on the down low’ with these laws.

      I understand that Dominica has been attempting to join other trade blocs, such as ALBA (the Chavez group). Dominica is welcome to do that.

      So, yes, Dominica is independent. So are we.

      Again, if the law is never to be enforced, and is causing problems with your assistance/trade partners, why be so insistent that the law remain on the books.

      Peace.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: G@Looked In: Gosh you are really something yourself. Accusing the younger partner of being hired. You have a sordid imagination.
      I guess some of the bitchiest people are gay men who are just not confident enough in their own sexuality that they need to find fault with others…

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Martin, I guess we’ll have to disagree. I can live with not screwing my partner on the dockside balcony of the cruise ship, in broad daylight, in full view of hundreds of people. In fact, I consider such an act to be disrespectful and out of control. Even if the law allowed it, I wouldn’t do it and would look unfavorably on those who did do it.

      You see it very differently, and are willing to throw all kinds of insults at people and whole countries. If you confine your travels to places where this behavior was accepted, you won’t be going very far. Indeed, you’d better cross the United States off of your list too, with the exception of a couple of blocks of San Francisco during a street fair or two.

      I’ve been to Denmark, by the way. Enjoyable enough, I suppose, but I don’t think I’d want to coop myself up there and in Sweden because I couldn’t screw in public anywhere else.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Accusing the younger partner of being hired. You have a sordid imagination.

      Poor Dennis and John, made to suffer the slings and arrows of our cruel, cruel world!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: I agree with you about Mr Hart not being a cause celebre. If he behaved like that in the USA, he might have actually received a longer jail term and had to register as a sex offender. I think from my posts its pretty clear I’m not defending them.

      To be clear, I’m much more upset with Atlantis over patrnoizing Grenada and Russia, than Dominica. The Russian situation is a real problem for them because the LGBT communtiy there has told everyone to stay away. Shouldn’t the local LGBT community count for something? Furthermore, as a highly visible Gay company, I think Atlantis has a bit of a higher standard to uphold. They gain a benefit, in the form of higher sales from that high profile. There is a cost to that as well. While you could go to St Petersburg (I’d still not like it if you did) without being seen as a Gay persons there, its impossible for Atlantis to do so. I’m really gonna be pissed if I see the Russians saying..see we let Atlantis dock here, as an excuse to deflect criticism of them beating the hell out of peaceful Gay protesters in that nation for exercising basic freedoms of speech and protest.

      With regards to Atlantis, I think that a Gay company should not be subsidizing anti-Gay nations when there are obvious substitutes (such as Martinique or Guadalupe – right next door). As well as their shocking dismissal of the impact of the persecution in Russia and the impact of criminalization statutes of those nations. If you look at the serious criticism of this incident in the South Florida Gay News, Care2, the Dallas Voice, and other sites, you’ll see that the criticism focuses on the choices Atlantis is making.

      I’ve never met anyone who said…’I really want to go to Dominica or Grenada on this next trip’. If the cruise did Bonaire, Isla Margarita, and Martinique instead of Barbados, Grenada, and Dominica, I doubt anyone would have complained.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      By the way, Martin, have you ever dared to venture outside of your European cocoon? Where have you traveled? And Houston Bill, people who live in Texas shouldn’t exactly be throwing stones.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @Houston bill

      You speak like you’re Barack Obama and congress. :)))) You don’t decide anything! Your country’s leader does and as far as we can tell they don’t even support the US LGBT community enough to ensure that your rights are passed across the board. If you guys were so influential in your country all these years of protesting from gay and lesbian yet the only difference between LGBT in US and LGBTin Dominica is that Dominica still have the law on its books. As I mentioned Kansas still has its laws.

      You do well to understand that my people are hardworkers. When our banana industry suffered because of the US capitalist practises we continued to work hard and survive. Dominicans aren’t intimidated by your little talks. We know how to be subsistence as that’s our way of life since before our country’s independence from the Queen!

      I didn’t know the Caribbean or Dominica remain on the DL? I think it was quite obvious where many people stood. Dominica is already a member of ALBA. :)

      Again why don’t you fix your own statutes in the United States that are set up for the LGBT community to fail? Not only is statutes like these setup against LGBT but many other laws which if you don’t fall into a certain “social sphere” you might just become victim of your own laws you boast and dangle over Dominicans head. I think you guys have 99 problems and Dominica sure ain’t one. But go ahead with your bad self. :))) you people… think every grasping for your bone.

      Do you know how much of a very small per centage tourism contributes to our economy?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: There is a difference between being outraged and saying something is stupid and telling people they are wrong, and being outraged and arresting people, putting people in jail or ultimately killing people over crimes against morality.

      Its the exact same outrage in Iraq over the EMO youth. Theyre bludgeoning them to death after kidnapping them.

      This is a slippery slope. There is no clear demarcation because morality is fluid and particular to groups and individuals.

      I dont fuck in public. I think its inconsiderate, but i wouldnt want people jailed if they were seen behind a bush or in a car. Many american films have a romantic meeting in a car btw

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Outspoken
      Outspoken

      Understand posting to social network to be deleted asap.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Houston Bill, the story really isn’t about where Atlantis goes. It’s about two out-of-control, overgrown kids, possibly on drugs, being arrested for indecent exposure. If this had happened dockside in an American port, they’d have faced the same penalty. And the idea that Americans, gay or otherwise, should wave a big wad of cash around and order other, smaller nations to allow this kind of thing because our tourist dollars are king, well, that strikes me as the epitome of arrogance.

      @Siri Siri, all I can say is that I hope you can step back and see this as a case of stupid individuals, and see that they are getting very little support among gay people.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @looked in americans are awesome sometimes!:) Larger than life personalities, always up for fun and always got something to say.:) But I think people in America quickly judge before getting the facts. Needless to say I’ve made many friends in the US and gay ones at that too especially in the city I live in. When I first got there it was like culture shock because I’m from a little island and the mud as mentioned by Martin :). But my views wasn’t strong about people and the lives they lived. So I meshed well into the gay community here. I love my US friends (GAY AND STRAIGHT) and we avoid the poisonous kinds.

      Please know that we have our own republican tea party type group in DOminica that we’re trying to educate. As you know dealing with any type of tea party type person is like communicating with someone with less than a brain. But its a small population.

      If Martin is any indication of scandinavia well….cause he/she just seem so vile. I mean address the issues in a mature way. Is that how you speak to people in scandinavia? But I guess that’s how you speak to people of an ethnicity you deem lower than yours right? I can tell you have no love for blacks by your posts. Just keeping on being vulgar. What nice way to promote scandainavia right? Who wants to be in stuck in ice over there in Norway sweden anyways. I rather be stuck in hot humid Lousiana in the middle of summer than in a country filled with what’s apparently very icy personalities!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      i wouldnt want people jailed if they were seen behind a bush or in a car

      I know someone who was arrested inside of a van, and jailed, in the United States, 30 years ago. That was wrong. I said so at the time, and am saying it now. But that’s not what happened here. You keep bringing up unrelated and hypothetical issues, rather than deal with the case at hand.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • xchamp
      xchamp

      perfect

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Looked In: I have travelled all over Europe and twice to USA. I wouldnt dream of going anywhere where gays are hated. Why should i? If gay friendlyness is a cocoon then im happy to stay within it.
      I do however study both history psychology and philosophy and am not intimidated by your remarks.

      When you want others to tolerate your sexuality you shouldnt prescribe prison for other consenting adults

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nineinchnail
      nineinchnail

      They would have been charged with public indecency had he done this in the US or anywhere else for that matter. This kind of behaviour gives gays a bad name.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan L
      Dan L

      @Axel Rod:

      Sorry, but public sex, in clear view of people who clearly aren’t interested in seeing it, is wrong, whether hetero- or homo-, *especially* in a country notoriously anti-gay.

      Porno Pete will milk this one forever, thanks guys.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • xchamp
      xchamp

      @Pickles: In Vermont you can legally walk anywhere in public naked but if you have sex in public gay or straight you will get your ass thrown in jail.
      This kind of shit is not going to HELP the gay people in these lands gain anything in the area of RIGHTs. I have little sympathy for them. They wanted to be observed… and made that choice.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Sari Sari: Im not a tourist magazine and the only BUT in your statement is that not all people in hot Louisiana feels so great there. Lots of gay teens feel bullied and some have killed themselves. Im on their side. And i dont give a rats arse about you…

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sari Sari
      Sari Sari

      @Martin your not on anyone side but your own! You have your own agenda and people like you derail the LGBT commnity efforts here in the US and elsewhere by pretending to care.

      I’m black and you don’t like blacks. Whether you don’t like black gays, you don’t like west indians, africans. It seems every country that’s predominantly black or influenced greatly by blacks you hate it.

      I’m glad you pointed that out about Lousiana. I’d like for someone to show me a gay teen in Dominica bullied that they committed death. Yet all across the US that’s what you hear daily. Then you guys want to thump your nose at my country.

      It was nice exchanging words but I gots to go. let’s hope FOX news don’t chose this picture to make headlines with next week! If they do American LGBT community will have another hurdle to cross..

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @SiriSiri, I’d caution you not to base your conclusions about the U.S. on what you see in the media, which in large part exists to get people riled up, or on the Internet, which is anonymous and unaccountable. Maybe the best way to figure out what we really care about is to look at how we spend our money. I doubt Dominica will suffer any damage from this, including from how gay tourists spend their money.

      Beyond that, I can only encourage you to get out and really see America, and to talk to people. I’ve been to every state, have driven a quarter-million road-trip miles here, and have flown upwards of half a million miles here. This is a huge, diverse, and insanely beautiful country. Don’t think you know it from TV and the Internet. Get out and around, and not just to the five or six big cities that everyone knows about. You’ll be glad you did.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: Why shouldn’t someone from Texas (and Alabama) not be qualified to criticize the anti-Gay laws of other places? We know exactly what those laws mean and how they can be applied. And for the record I’ve lived in Latin America for 3 years and Europe for 2. I speak 3 languages as well. I’ve worked in over 20 nations. I’ve been to over 40 of them.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: You are free to call me arrogant because I expect accountablity for my tax dollars. Please understand that others might find your as well as Atlantis’ attitude reeking of appeasement and collaboration.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Huh ...
      Huh ...

      @Martin: Wow, Martin. What a hateful, ignorant comment. Western Europe may be all the things you say, but you are living proof that even rich, advanced countries can produce shitty human beings.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 213 · i was on the cruise wrote, “@B: oh for fuck sake. You’re being deiblerately dense and obtuse.”

      Is that your way of indicating your reading comprehension problem?

      Then, “The two guys’ cabin was on DECK 5 of the ship. Its not that high up from the waterline of the ship. The ship has 12 decks. The picture is an accurate depiction of the angle from the end of the pier. Having been there, my guess is the picture was taken from somewhere on the middle of the pier. And, if that’s the case it was taken by a passenger or perhaps a Celebrity crew member.”

      Sigh. Read what I said – if they were in the middle of the doc or the end of the pier (the end furthest from the ship), you’d need a telephoto lens or a cropped and enlarged image to see what was shown. It’s merely how optics work. If the picture was taken from right next to the ship, you’d have been looking upwards. Judging from the pictures of the ship as a whole, these guys would have to have been at least 40 feet above the dock. If taken on the dock, not above it, the camera would have had to be roughly 150 to 300 feet away horizontally for that viewing angle – if closer the image of the underside of the balcony above them would be significantly larger. If we knew the dimensions of that part of the ship, we could calculate how far away the camera was given the picture.

      Finally this idiot says, “What’s more important here is why you cannot accept the personal accounts of dozens’ of people who knew exactly what happened? Why did you need photographic evidence?”

      What’s so idiotic is that I never said one thing about personal accounts beyond the fact that eye witnesses tend to make lots of mistakes, and that is a well-documented fact. Read http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm , http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr06/eyewitness.aspx , and http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Eyewitness_Identification_Could_You_Identify_a_Suspect.php?gclid=CP_a1Nb-ka8CFckJRQodGlQ90w . I also did not even ask for photographic evidence of these two guys, and just that a picture of the ship by the dock would be useful (to see if the balcony was designed in such a way that you could see below someone’s waist).

      Queerty showed the picture on its own, in case you didn’t notice. I commented on the picture – it doesn’t provide proof that these guys were doing it because a single image of two guys, both upright, while consistent with them having sexual intercourse, is also consistent with them just hugging after the act. Queerty claimed the picture showed them “in flagrante” and that is really just an assumption. All the picture shows for sure is that they were on the balcony, very close to each other, with their clothes off.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Sari Sari: Yes, our state department has noted that you were one of the first nations to latch onto Chavez. Noted.

      Seriously you guys are free to play the Taiwan/China payoffs for recognition game too. And to sell diplomatic recognition of Abakhazia and South Ossetia in return for Russian payoffs.

      Just don’t ask for (or demand) my taxdollars, my patronage, or my silence without my input.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: Huh. Look at that. 3 languages. Visited 40 countries. Worked in 20. 3 years in Latin America and 2 in Europe.

      And still every inch the ugly American.

      Here’s an idea: When you visit number 41, try to venture for at least 5 minutes outside the tourist areas, get to know some actual locals, keep an open mind (if you can, though I don’t hold out hope), and for Chrissake, try to LEARN something. Maybe then, you’ll get out of this habit of thinking that being from the US and having a couple of dollars to spend gives you the moral right to pass judgment on each and every culture in the world.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @Huh …: Truth hurts?

      Ask yourself why Western Europe realised gay rights long ago. Denmark legalised pornography in 1963 and introduced gay civil partnerships in 1987. Thats 25 years ago. Im not being superior here im pointing to the obvious that freedoms come from tolerance and engaging in a moral crusade is not tolerance.
      As a distinct minority here i use whatever language i please to defend against the abuse heaped on me from all sides.
      The trouble with most posters here is that their own sex is love and beauty and deserve respect. The pervs on the other hand, they can go to prison. Guess what most of the world agrees with you, except they LABEL YOU as the pervs…

      Things can change. In 1932 Weimar Germany was Europes most gay tolerant place. In 1933 Hitler came to power…

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 282 · Eric Auerbach wrote, “@B: LOL. Is this what they’re teaching you in law school?”

      The discussion was about what a picture actually shows. It’s not my fault that some idiots, you included, have trouble understanding that. As I said, “All the picture shows for sure is that they were on the balcony, very close to each other, with their clothes off.” It’s not like they showed any back-and-forth motion. You can’t in a single picture.

      I’d guess you never learned that a good test of a hypothesis is a test that can disprove it. The picture is not a good test for determining if these two were having sex because it can’t distinguish having sex from (say) just standing there and hugging after doing it inside their cabin. All the picture shows is that it was justifiable to arrest them for public nudity (which apparently is illegal there). A $50 fine would suffice for that.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: Yeah, you’re right. When the cops were shown this picture (because they were, of course, shown this picture), they obviously jumped to conclusions and the arrest was therefore uncalled for. Same thing with the judge, who also saw this picture; after examining it, he should’ve asked for more evidence.

      I mean, it’s not like there were actual *witnesses* on the dock, and it’s not like it was those witnesses who notified the police of what was going on. No. This picture is all the evidence the local authorities in Dominica had to go on, and, therefore, they couldn’t have been sure of what went on between those two men.

      Thanks for making that point clear. You’re obviously NOT a moron.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 5:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: And you are free to defend countries that criminalize being Gay, simply becuase its a local perspective. I don’t think it is a vaild local perspective, but rather a violation of very basic human rights.

      You are free to advocate that contries should be able to demand my taxdollars without my input. I don’t think I owe them squat. They have to earn my respect and support. And their insistance on clinging to this law is evidence of how much respect they have for any Gay person.

      With regards to placing monetary rewards on good behavior, Dominica is one of the world champions in that regard. The sell diplomatic recognition at the UN. A significant portion of their passport holders have never been on the island (you can get a Dominican passport for 105000). They’re attempting to market themselves as a tax haven (e.g., a place for the 1%, and perhaps drug dealers/deposed despots/tax cheats) to cheat the people of the western world through tax cheating. If its fair for the Dominicans themselves to be selling their nation for cash, then its fair for others to demand that they at least take the concerns of those nations that are supporting their nation through the CBI and other measures into strong account.

      Let the Chinese, the Venezuelans, and the Russians give them foreign aid, work visas, and import preferences. Besides it appears as if the entire economy is on a pay for play basis. At least I would not be paying for them to discriminate.

      Dominica doesn’t produce squat I can’t get elsewhere. I don’t use patchouli, I can buy bananas from Honduras or Mexico, and I certainly can travel to other sunny places that don’t cling to anti-Gay laws. I don’t need to launder money. I don’t owe them anything. Neither does the US government. They’d do well to understand that when they scream ‘but we’re an independent nation’ when their above board trade partners and funders request they repeal a law they say they don’t even use.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sammy
      Sammy

      I wanna see the entire actual balcony scene….by Raging Stallions Studios!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Blah, bla..huh?
      Blah, bla..huh?

      This was taken at 10:00 am on the eastern dock. Meanwhile, by 8:30m on the Western docks, there were 5 straight couples fucking while hanging banners for their amateur porn website addresses, beckoning the crowd estimated at 80-100 Dominicans to subscribe. As we all know, breeders hate being upstaged.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville
      The Real Mike in Asheville

      @DAlady: Win many cases?

      It is disingenuous to base legal precedent on a case that has been superseded by a later case; as a DA lady, you know that, so why try to pass along patently false information?

      As pointed out by others, both the Georgia Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court have issued ruling post Bowers invalidating Georgia’s anti-sodomy laws.

      *****

      The issues of public sex and anti-gay laws are separate issues.

      Except as part of the promotion of gay rights in countries hostile to gays and lesbians, gay dollars should not be sent in countries that harass and criminalize the gay community.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: Hah. In the US, you can get a Green Card by investing 500k in the country; in Austria, a 10 million investment Euros gets you outright citizenship. The difference between those countries and Dominica? Dominica’s up-front about what’s going on, and is not as expensive.

      And as for tax havens, you might want to look into the issue:

      http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/06/tax-havens-delaware-bermuda-markets-singapore-belgium.html

      Yeah. Seems like “the Western world” does a lot of its own cheating, and it’s not just the big evil Caribbean islands who are out to bilk the poor, defenseless little guys in North America and Europe.

      See what I mean about being an ugly American? 40 countries, and you’ve learned nothing about the world.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: Eric, but the US green card is contingent on you living there. Dominica sells passports to people who have no intention of having any tie to Dominica at all. Its not the behavior of a country that should be taken as seriously.

      The reason behind the US green card (versus the Dominican CITIZENSHIP rule) is that a green card does not signify citizenship. You still have to wait 7 years to apply for citizenship.

      You really are clueless. I leave you to apologizing for anti-Gay nations that cling to laws designed to criminalize its’ LGBT citizens.

      Where did you get your ‘knowledge’ of the world. From a reggae concert?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: For the distinction between the US visa program and the one in Dominica, as well as its ramifications for the respect that the Dominican government itself has for its’ national identity, I present this editorial in the press in Dominica! Seriously, Dominica is being laughed at and ridiculed. By Bangladesh!

      http://www.dominicacentral.com/blogs/passport-selling-akin-to-human-trafficking.html

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Christopher Banks
      Christopher Banks

      Inappropriate behaviour, and it unfortunately clouds the real issue at stake here: WHY are gay businesses taking boatloads of gay men to destinations where their safety is potentially at risk? None of this changes the fact that homosexuality in Dominica is illegal and punishable by imprisonment. WHERE is their responsibility in all this?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: “I leave you to apologizing for anti-Gay nations that cling to laws designed to criminalize its’ LGBT citizens.”

      Yeah, except that I haven’t actually touched on any of Dominica’s anti-gay laws. I talked about your Ugly American attitude and your characterization of Dominica’s citizenship and tax laws; is your reading comprehension any better in either of the 2 other languages? Maybe if I write in them you’ll actually understand what is being said.

      “The reason behind the US green card (versus the Dominican CITIZENSHIP rule) is that a green card does not signify citizenship. You still have to wait 7 years to apply for citizenship.”

      Oh, so all you can buy in the US is the right to live and work there, as well as the right to bring your relatives along? Well, the US is only the richest, most powerful country in the world, so I guess it’s only fair if it’s a *little* pickier than a poor, 70k-citizen island in the Caribbean. I mean, your hair-splitting *clearly* shows that on this issue, the US is morally superior to Dominica.

      But you’re right about the rest of the things you say: tiny, poor Dominica *is* responsible for the existence of tax cheaters in the Western world, and you, as an American with dollars to spend, are completely entitled to look down on every country that isn’t exactly like the suburban Texas community you live in now.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • R Lebeau
      R Lebeau

      I was on that ship…we had a lovely day in Dominica. The local merchants were welcoming and friendly. I’m sure there is homophobia (much like my Southern home state) but it certainly did not manifest itself to anyone who acted like a reasonable human being.

      These two idiots sure played the victims. I’m glad that these photos now set the record straight. If you think a particular country has a homophobic attitude then DON’T GO THERE. Atlantis takes its passengers on a safe and fun trip to many places you might not normally go. They acted in the best interest of these two when trouble reared its head for them. Please do not blame the line and the country. This isn’t Mardi Gras (and trust me, they’d have been cited and/or arrested had they pulled the same stunt there). There were small girls selling flowers and helping their families on the dock in full view of inconsiderate a-hole #1 and 2.

      I’m no prude, but there is a time and place for everything. And fucking in full view of 100+ people (plus everyone leaving or returning to the ship) is about as stupid as you can get. People will blame everyone but the people who set this chain in motion but at some point, personal responsibility comes into play.

      A friend of mine who is a cop is gay but if a drag queen walked up to him and called him a pig and spit on him, well, god help him/her. And there would still be people claiming an anti-gay bent there!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @B:

      You are truly dense and obtuse. what part of this don’t you understand? There were hundreds of people on the pier who saw what happened. Many have posted first hand accounts, which you’ve read. They included locals, passengers, Celebrity crew and Atlantis staff. EVERYONE saw it.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 7:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @B:

      You truly are an idiot. I was there. You did not need a telephoto lens. It was a short pier. You weren’t there, yet you want to argue the facts, in fact, you make up your own facts. You’re being like some wannabe Perry Mason. That picture, its angle, and its perspective are entirely accurate, having walked that pier and having been on the same ship. Your talking out your ass and you don’t even have a point. In the context of all your other comments in these stories, I can see why you’ve gone off the deep end. What a fucking marooon.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: we in dominica did not arrest 35 people for “gay” buggery. the anti-buggery law has been invoked for cases of rape and NOT homosexuality. buggery applies to male and female–it means anal sex. If a person has been raped in the anus the law is invoked to ensure a stricter conviction. So again–those arrests under that anti buggery law have been in RAPE cases and not as you are saying for gay sex. people have not gotten arrested in dominica for “gay” sex for decades. You need to stop posting that shit. [i am dominican--i think i know better than you]—we are not anti-gay just anti lying assholes!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @Grant:

      I agree with you. I was on the ship, and I’ve known since day one these guys were lying. But, I don’t blame them for lying. They were facing some serious time in prison. However, if you’re going to criticize the person who submitted the pic, you should also be criticizing those here who were demanding photo and video evidence. Idiots like “B” have been screaming their tits off for the evidence for days. Dominica has an extradition treaty with the US. These guys committed a felony in Dominica, and then they perjured themselves in front of a Dominican judge. Hell, they HAD to lie !! But, that didn’t stop the needy queens who were ironically defending these two idiots from demanding evidence, which if posted, would put them at further legal risk. This world is not shy of fucking idiots, and neither is the gay community. Fucking idiots !

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      @Houston Bill: Sorry it took so long to get back, been busy..

      The issue is twofold for me. Were the men idiotic to do this? YES. However, I think the promotion/organizational folks of these gay cruises have a responsibility to at least warn their passengers of the laws of certain locations. While here in the first/western world we don’t have full rights, nobody is making us ILLEGAL. There is a difference.

      I went on a lesbian cruise once. Naked people everywhere. Nobody batted an eye, nobody got arrested. That’s why I think the responsibility lies with both parties. Don’t be a dumbass on these cruises, sure; however, the cruise has the responsibility to let us, as a special interest group, know of stops with laws against us.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Pedro: Maybe it’s because you keep posting the same $hit over and over again. We get it. You think old people are gross. It’s been entered into the record. Can we move on? Are you capable of saying other things?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @R Lebeau: I’m glad you had fun supporting the economies of Dominica, Grenada, and Barbados. Perhaps you’ll have fun supporting the homophobes in Russia, if you go on the Baltic Cruise.

      But just so you know…the LGBT community has asked you to not go…Atlantis is behaving irresponsibly….I sure wouldn’t go to a party I was asked not to attend…Why would Atlantis?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @DAlady: WELL SAID!!!

      And btw, what do they mean the prison conditions were horrible? They were in jail–did they expect to be treated differently than any other jailbird? Anyway those two are fucking liars—most likely they did get special treatment anyway—just like their lienient sentence—they make me sick!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: You are free to continue to argue that other nations have the right to my tax dollars without any accountability. I don’t own Dominica squat. And its long past time that Dominica does something to earn our support.

      And yes, we have leverage over Dominica. There’s a friggin reason that Saudi Arabia doesn’t change. Its because we really can’t do that much about them. People aren’t going to stop driving. As much as I would like to. If you think that LGBT communities shouldn’t use the leverage that they have over economies that are almost completely dependent upon the economies whose values they largely offend, then yes, I think you are foolish.

      They have no right to our money. If they’d like to act like jerks, then I say let someone else carry their economy.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Pickles:
      “They were having sex, not sacrificing children. Jesus. Couldn’t they have just be given a fine and sent on their way?”

      AM….THEY WERE FINED AND SENT ON THEIR WAY. UNLESS YOU CAN’T READ?

      “Everyone here is acting like it’s rational for two people (of any gender or sexual orientation) to be ARRESTED for having sex.
      People have sex in parked cars, in bathroom, in the library stacks, anywhere and everywhere.”

      AM….WELL PEOPLE DO COCAINE AND CRACK EVERYWHERE TOO, INCLUDING CARS BATHROOMS AND LIBRARIES—BUT—HERE’S THE KICKER—JUST LIKE PUBLIC SEX—DRUGS ARE AGAINST THE LAW. SO YOU GET CAUGHT YOU GET ARRESTED. THAT’S THE LAW. OR DO THESE LIARS DESERVE SPECIAL TREATMENT? PLUS, THE OUTRAGE IS ALSO WITH THEIR LIES. THEY COULD HAVE SAID YES WE DID IT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE A THRILL OR WE WANTED TO SAY FUCK OFF TO DOMINICANS–WHAT THEY DID INSTEAD WAS TO TOTALLY DENY THAT THEY OUT RIGHTLY BROKE THE LAW AND CLAIMED THAT THEY WERE ARRESTED SIMPLY FOR BEING GAY. WICKEDLY THEY WERE IMPLIEDLY CALLING FOR THE TOTAL BOYCOTT OF A WONDERFUL COUNTRY THAT HAD WELCOMED THEM AND GAVE THEM BETTER TREATMENT THAN THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN HAD THEY BEEN LOCALS. THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE OUTRAGE. THOSE TWO A VILE HUMAN BEINGS—FUCKING VILE!!!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @z: Ok, then I suggest you take it up with Wikipedia, that has that fact listed on their LGBT rights page. They have a pretty easy challenge process for their citations.

      And again, if the law is never to be enforced against private consensual sex between non-related adults, then WHY be so insistent about retaining it? You can make sodomy in a rape case against the law while making it legal for consensual private sex. No one has provided any reason why Dominica should continue to criminalize sex between two consenting males in private. No one. Your government could make all this go away by simply reforming the law. Repealing this law is not going to turn Dominica into San Francisco.

      Dominica’s retention of this law harms its relationships with its largest aid and trade partners.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ps guy 2012
      Ps guy 2012

      They got what they deserved. Gay or straight public sex is not tolerated anywhere. The guys were idiots!

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      @Ps guy 2012: Some people think they should be stoned for their crimes, like in the Bible. What is your opinion of this type of punishment? Too harsh or too lenient?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bigg
      Bigg

      @Kev C – I think they may have already been stoned by the time the picture was taken… Although not perhaps like in the Bible.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve Adams
      Steve Adams

      I hope they apologize. They did all these news interviews like it was some casual thing they came on their balcony and got spotted. Just man up to the truth, this really makes gays look stupid.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ps guy 2012
      Ps guy 2012

      Well said @ bigg

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve Adams
      Steve Adams

      Here is a link of them saying they didn’t have sex (news report in LA) http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/03/two-men-on-caribbean-cruise-deny-having-sex-before-arrest.html

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: Hey, guess what? The US-Dominica balance of trade is 26 million dollars in the US’s favor, the US gives no direct aid to Dominica (China and the EU are Dominica’s main donors), and tourism (only a fraction of which can be attributed to US travelers) accounts for a small percentage of the country’s economy.

      So what are you talking about?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Domi
      Domi

      @Houston Bill: The US is not a major development partner for us. Please google. After what happened and how we were attacked on media, many of us dont want american tourists again. Even I as a gay guy I dont want them here again. These two have pushed back our cause 20 years!! They left LGBT dominicans to pay for their lies! I think the best thing is to just amicably cut tourism ties with America and deal with Europe, Asia, Canada and Australia.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: SIGH….clearly you are stuck in a mindset. you REALLY think, that IF Dominica had even an inkling to enforce that law, that they would choose NOT to enforce it, particularly in THIS of all cases?

      i mean that was gay sex in plain view and daylight and the buggery law was NOT enforced! sound homophobic to you silly rabbit?

      you know why it was NOT enforced? because we DO NOT enforce it between consenting homosexuals. it’s not because the police didn’t know those men were indeed having sex (buggery)–it is because no one was bothered with enforcing an archaic law that has not been applied to gay men for decades.think about it. you have a cause but you’ve picked the wrong country.

      Just like america–that law is indeed on the books BUT not enforced. get it get it? why the fuck can’t you get it? IT IS NOT ENFORCED!!! fuck! you’re annoying.

      the law is to protect rape victims NOT to be used against gays.

      America has a differnt legal set up, larger more diverse population which required a constitutional motion to prevent the anti gay laws from being enforced despite being on its books. ok, we don’t have that—but, we have a less complicated society and the courts can choose not to enforce the anti-buggery laws against gays without much further motion. at the end of the day, both countries have anti gay laws–neither enforce them. the end. Geez you’re an asshole.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 9:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      further—these men were NOT “paraded”. they had police escort–(car)

      they spent little time in the “horrible” cells–spent most of their time in an office (special treatment)

      they lied not just in court—but back in america—about not having sex

      they lied to the world that they were prosecuted for being gay.

      sickening asshole motherfuckers

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Russ
      Russ

      @Johnny: OMG same thing popped into my head. LMAO

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Domi, if you read my prior comments you will see that I don’t condone what Dennis Mayer and John Hart did, nor do I have any sympathy for them. But it’s hard to believe that their stupidity set you back by 20 years.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Please understand that others might find your as well as Atlantis’ attitude reeking of appeasement and collaboration.

      I don’t think someone who lives in Texas ought to be telling anyone else that they are an appeasing collaborator. LOL

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Badabum!
      Badabum!

      @Russ: OMG you’re like, a dumb queen! OMG! Don’t you just like, totally wanna be a 15-year-old white girl from the suburbs? OMG LOL FTW IMHO UFUCKINGSUCK ROFLMAO!!!!! —-

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Inappropriate behaviour, and it unfortunately clouds the real issue at stake here: WHY are gay businesses taking boatloads of gay men to destinations where their safety is potentially at risk?

      The issue here is that two circuit bunnies decided they’d screw in full view of hundreds of people, and then lie about it. There’s no gay rights angle, and if you don’t want to take an Atlantis cruise (I sure don’t) then don’t take one.

      I think the promotion/organizational folks of these gay cruises have a responsibility to at least warn their passengers of the laws of certain locations.

      My understanding from reading other comments is that Atlantis does warn their passengers of the laws of certain locations.

      You are free to advocate that contries should be able to demand my taxdollars without my input. I don’t think I owe them squat. They have to earn my respect and support. And their insistance on clinging to this law is evidence of how much respect they have for any Gay person.

      No one was charged with buggery. They were charged with indecent exposure.

      I have travelled all over Europe and twice to USA. I wouldnt dream of going anywhere where gays are hated.

      Hypocrite! If those fellas did that dockside in a U.S. city, they’d have been charged with the same crime. Why come to the United States?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Badabum!
      Badabum!

      @Looked In: The US has a lower ratio of brown-to-white people. Plus, it’s richer, so it’s better. Duh.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      The comments from “Martin” are oddly comforting in a certain way. It’s nice to know that the spirit of the Republican Party isn’t unique to the United States. There is plenty of simplistic, unsophisticated, self-serving, dualistic, myopic, hypocrisy outside of our borders.

      Yup, Martin, if they’re not with us, they’re against us. The main difference I see between you and George W. Bush is that you don’t have a military to give orders to. And let us all thank the celestial probability tables for that.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Badabum!
      Badabum!

      @Looked In: Well, Looked In, you clearly need to get your facts right. Yes, it’s true that perfect, heaven-like Denmark is the Western world’s most notoriously xenophobic country, but c’mon! It’s not as if there’s ANYTHING Martin has said that makes it seem as if he hates other cultures. No. Nothing at all. He’s proof that Denmark is not the self-satisfied haven of xenophobia that its xenophobic laws, its xenophobic political parties, and its xenophobic publications would lead one to believe. No, Martin proves that Denmark is not like that at all.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      @Spike: Choosing to ignore you. I simply think it is irresponsible to take a cruise liner full of gays to an anti gay island. And have you ever been on a gay cruise or to a gay resort of any kind? If so, I don’t need to provide links. It can be a wild time.

      And I asked, I didn’t say this cruise was promoted as such.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 299 · “i was on the cruise” made a fool of himself by saying, “@B: You truly are an idiot. I was there. You did not need a telephoto lens. It was a short pier. You weren’t there, yet you want to argue the facts, in fact, you make up your own facts.”

      Aside from lying (“make up your own facts”) this idiot doesn’t have a clue about photography. You do in fact need a telephoto lens. A telephoto lens is not a synonym for a telescope. Rather, it is a lens with a focal length non-trivially longer than a “normal” lens – one whose field of view matches that of the human eye.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view has some examples. For 35 mm film, a normal lens has a focal length of 50 mm. The horizontal and vertical fields of view are 46.8 degrees and 27.0 degrees respectively. From even as little as 100 feet away horizontally, you would see more than is shown in Queerty’s picture. Either it was enlarged and cropped or a telephoto lens was used, just as I said. Today, even a fairly inexpensive point-and-shoot camera can have a zoom lens that, at maximum magnification, is essentially a telephoto lens, probably going to the equivalent of an 85mm to a 135 mm lens for a 35 mm camera.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @B, we don’t know how the picture has been edited. I use Adobe Lightroom to process my pictures, and my experience with it tells me that there are plenty of ways that the photo published by Queerty could have been cropped. We do know a few things, though:

      1. Contrary to what you wrote before, it was shot looking upwards, i.e., from the dock.

      2. Numerous witnesses on the dock report having seen them screwing. The photo confirms what those witnesses reported.

      It’s ludicrous to suggest, as you have, that their behavior wasn’t visible to people on the dock. They were arrested, charged, and convicted of the offense they committed: indecent exposure. To argue anything else is a dodge, and you know it.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Just to add some more information, there is something everyone seems to have missed. If you look at Queerty’s picture, one floor up and one balcony to the left, you can make out (barely) a person standing in his room with the door closed but obviously shirtless. If you digitally enhance the photo, I’d give it about a 75% chance that he was also completely naked.

      So, do (some of) you guys think he should have been arrested too?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Frank
      Frank [Different person #1 using similar name]

      They deserve to have ended up in the slammer…sex is a private activity, whether gay, straight, bisexual or autosexual…if they were in the US they would have been charged just the same.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @B

      I don’t see anything indecent in that part of the photo.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      well, public sex is pretty much prohibited everywhere. I think they also would have been given a hard time if they were straight. If we want equal rights, equal decorum isn’t too much to expect.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Curtis
      Curtis

      COMMENT # 336!

      .. can you say, ‘scandalous’?

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jethro
      jethro

      “No Comment” should’ve been their defense. A retired Bay Area police officer and former Alaska Airlines Station Manager didn’t have better situational awareness…seriously? I’m sure in the course of their careers they had to enforce rules upon others that seemed like more trivial injustices; hypocritical and INTENTIONAL. Bottom line…there’s a time and a place for everything. Now they might land a spot on Locked Up Abroad. Glad they made it out alive.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: O

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 330 · “i was on the cruise”, trying to cover up his mistakes, wrote, “@B:
      Wow, what a freak. You’re obsessing about something that you didn’t even see. You refuse to accept the truth.” What a liar this guy is! Just like everyone else reading this article, I saw the picture at the start of it, and that is what I was commenting on.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 11:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Moby
      Moby

      First, let me get this off my chest before delving into the issue at hand. The issue here is not their act of sex. It is about them behaving inappropriately under the law in a port of call and their subsequent treatment. And the idea that we somehow have to hold ourselves to a higher standard to obtain the rights we deserve as human-beings is ludicrous! I feel sorry for anyone who thinks so little of themselves that they would feel that way.

      To the issue itself, people gay OR straight do dumb things. Doing something dumb, careless, or even flagrant doesn’t change who or what I am. Nor should it change how I am treated under the law. We are not yet at a place, even in THIS country, where that is the norm much less abroad.

      And for all of you with the holier-than-thou attitudes here, before you decide someone is undeserving of rights, let me remind you even in this country sodomy was illegal up until the last decade. YOU were breaking the law of the land every time you had sex w/someone of the same-gender. A poor decision, even compounded by a lie, does not negate the issue of inequality here. Had they been straight they would have been treated completely different. There would have been no throngs of people in the streets yelling threats and taunts. Nor would they have spent the night in jail taunted, humiliated, and deprived of even the most basic human necessities. Had a straight couple been arrested, does anyone seriously think they would have been subjected to the same in-humane treatment? THAT is the point.

      It is unfortunate these two chose to be dishonest about their behavior. They’ve totally side-lined the real issue here now.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • matt
      matt

      @z: I’ll take you at your word that the laws are not enforced in Dominica but I don’t think it’s fair to compare a legal system that chooses to not enforce a law and one that has declared that law unconstitutional. When the laws were still enforceable in the US but very rarely enforced in practice, they were used to oppose any attempt at expansion of gay rights and were used as a justification for discrimination by giving LGBT citizens the mark of being presumptive criminals. These arguments were used by government officials including even US Supreme court justices.

      After Lawrence v Texas those arguments were taken away and there had been considerably more expansion of gay rights now that those laws have been officially invalidated. I agree that people in here are unfairly trying to claim that Dominica is some terrible anti-gay country but I’d also say that it’s unfair to try to claim that the legal and social situation for LGBT citizens in Dominica and the US is comparable. Just going off of personal accounts I’ve read recently from Dominicans I know that I can do a lot of things here as a gay man that would not be accepted as readily in your country.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • plinkoboi
      plinkoboi

      I know these guys and understand why they lied in Dominica (because they were scared – who wouldn’t be?) and why they spoke out as “victims” when back on U.S. soil (because they’re still liars). Back in Palm Springs they were like, “holy shit, what just happened…we better chew some gum so we don’t look so (Deck 6) high.” As soon as the news broke I already knew their MO (no pun intended) and probably the truth. I’m glad it finally came out.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 331 · Looked In dissembled by saying:

      “1. Contrary to what you wrote before, it was shot looking upwards, i.e., from the dock.”
      Liar – I said it was shot from roughly 150 to 300 feet along the dock, or on a closer but
      elevated structure. The camera is clearly pointed far closer to horizontal than vertical.

      “2. Numerous witnesses on the dock report having seen them screwing. The photo confirms what those witnesses reported.” The photo does not confirm what those witnesses reported because it cannot distinguish screwing from hugging. All it shows is that the couple were naked and very close to each other.

      Then “Looked In” finished with a bald-faced lie: “It’s ludicrous to suggest, as you have, that their behavior wasn’t visible to people on the dock.” Of course, that is a statement I never made. For Queerty’s first article, I commented that there was a need for more information such as a picture of the ship (to see if you could see below someone’s waist given the typical height of a balcony railing and the need to make it difficult for passengers to fall overboard). Finally I noted a picture in a link Queerty subsequently provided and posted a comment that whatever is below the railing is sufficiently transparent.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Texndoc
      Texndoc

      ““2. Numerous witnesses on the dock report having seen them screwing. The photo confirms what those witnesses reported.” The photo does not confirm what those witnesses reported because it cannot distinguish screwing from hugging. All it shows is that the couple were naked and very close to each other.”

      So true!

      Maybe like when I walked in on Mommy and Daddy when I was three, they were just playing Leapfrog.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: Yeah. That’s the issue here. Photographic technology. That’s what I’ve been talking about all along.

      PS: Seriously. Don’t try to be a lawyer. I’m not saying this to be mean, I’m saying it for your own good. You’re not bright. That doesn’t mean you can’t have a fine life, and be a good, upstanding member of society, and have fulfilling relationships and people in your life who love you. It just means you can’t base your livelihood on not being the dumbest guy in the room. Because 9 times out of 10, you will be.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • steve
      steve

      Shame on them…Think they should both get 100 lashes w a wet noodle…lol…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: I just can’t get enough of your hilariousness.

      The cops showed up because witnesses on the pier called them after watching the guys have sex on the balcony. But you’re arguing that the cops didn’t have reason to book the guys because a picture produced after the fact isn’t clear enough to show if penetration actually took place.

      You do realize that the photo isn’t actually what the police and the judge used as basis for arresting/fining these men, right? You do grasp that much, don’t you?

      Oh wait, you don’t. Which is why you’ve been arguing that they were unfairly punished. Because you think this photo is what got them arrested.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      There would have been no throngs of people in the streets yelling threats and taunts.

      That didn’t happen in Dominica either.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No. 340 · Eric Auerbach and his silly “law school” crap.

      Eric, I know you have, as they say, “issues” and need to grow up. In particular, you need to learn that it is not acceptable for people to argue about obviously factual comments.

      For example, I originally simply pointed out that the picture had been cropped or taken with a telephoto lens, if photographed at dock level, giving an estimate (and how to improve it) of the distance of the camera from the ship. Some moron then seemed to think that a telephoto lens was a synonym for a telescope. Having some idea of where the picture was taken is germane to the discussion. The only reason other than stupidity to argue with that is to try to justify the way Dominica treated these two guys (too harshly in my opinion – they should have gotten a 50 dollar “parking” ticket, where they could pay the fine and then either contest it or leave town as they desired. There was no need to throw them in jail unless there was credible evidence that they were engaged in sexual activity (e.g. intercourse) in public. That picture is not enough – surely the person taking it could have taken a few more or made a video, a common feature with even low-cost point-and-shoot cameras these days. But that didn’t happen. They should have sorted through the evidence first and only arrest them after ascertaining that it was likely that a serious crime was committed, not what would be called an “infraction” in the U.S.

      http://www.swlaw.edu/pdfs/lr/37_4taslitz.pdf has a good example of the issues (although there are some badly worded statements about things like “selection effects”). This paper discusses various ways in which we end up convicting innocent people due to prejudices of various kinds. While the examples are mostly about racial prejudice, you just might expect similar injustices resulting from other forms of discrimination, including discrimination based on sexual orientation.

      Given all the anti-gay propaganda out there, how many people believe that all gays spend their weekends at circuit parties with copious quantities of drugs and sex? We can’t make those prejudices go away instantly, but we can institute procedures to help ensure that such prejudices do not influence the outcome of judicial proceedings, even if we can’t do a perfect job of that. It’s certainly reasonable to ask of Dominica has such procedures in place. If not, then just maybe gay cruises should skip that country.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      There was no need to throw them in jail unless there was credible evidence that they were engaged in sexual activity (e.g. intercourse) in public. That picture is not enough – surely the person taking it could have taken a few more or made a video, a common feature with even low-cost point-and-shoot cameras these days.

      There were multiple reports from witnesses who said it happened. The photo merely confirms it.

      Given all the anti-gay propaganda out there, how many people believe that all gays spend their weekends at circuit parties with copious quantities of drugs and sex?

      Most people have no idea what a “circuit party” is, but I do. In any case, John Hart and Dennis Mayer behaved in a way that would suggest they are circuit party types.

      We can’t make those prejudices go away instantly, but we can institute procedures to help ensure that such prejudices do not influence the outcome of judicial proceedings, even if we can’t do a perfect job of that. It’s certainly reasonable to ask of Dominica has such procedures in place. If not, then just maybe gay cruises should skip that country.

      Something tells me that Dominica wouldn’t be terribly crushed if the Palm Springs circuit crowd decided not to visit. I really doubt they need the money that badly.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: Wow. It’s amazing. You just don’t get the very simple idea I’m trying to convey, even though I keep repeating it in as simple a way as I can.

      THESE GUYS WERE NOT ARRESTED BASED ON THIS PHOTO.

      THEY WERE ARRESTED BECAUSE WITNESSES CALLED THE POLICE.

      THIS PHOTO IS NOT ACTUALLY RELATED TO THEIR ARREST.

      I really don’t know how much clearer I can make this. If you talk again about telephoto lenses or argue again that “this picture is not enough to convict them,” then it’ll become clear that your issues go way beyond poor reading comprehension skills; you have a full-on learning disability.

      Either that, or you’re some weird performance artist parodying a law student.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 346 · Eric Auerbach wrote, “@B: Yeah. That’s the issue here. Photographic technology. That’s what I’ve been talking about all along.” [rest of Eric's infantile garbage ignored].

      Eric, you are a fool. The point of discussing some details about how it was filmed was to estimate the distance of the camera from the ship. Are you really so incredibly stupid as to not see that this is relevant to the discussion? If the camera was 300 feet away, that picture by itself is not evidence that these guys were easily seen by the public – it doesn’t imply that you can get a clear view when closer (nor does it show that you do not get such a view).

      If you are using a camera to submit evidence regarding some event, you need to know what the camera actually did. There are a lot of tricks you can do without digital processing to create misleading images. Want to make a traffic jam look bad? Get a long ways off and photograph it with a 1000 mm lens. The foreshortening will make the cars look packed closely together. Want to make a traffic jam look like a non-event? Use a 24 mm lens. The frame will be mostly filled with a single car and other traffic will be deemphasized.

      All those details are important – without them, you don’t know what you are actually measuring and can end up jumping to the wrong conclusion. It can work both ways – if I was there and wanted to dishonestly exonerate them, the trick would have been to take a picture from shore with a 22 mm lens (assuming 35 mm film or its digital equivalent) so the image of the two would be too tiny to make out clearly. Or take a picture from the
      dock but right next to the ship. With a 22 mm lens, the ship will appear further away than it really is, and the floor of their balcony will obscure part of them, giving the impression that nothing objectionable was visible.

      BTW, don’t forget the other guy in Queerty’s picture – the guy one floor higher and a room to the left. If you adjust the contrast and do some filtering to “sharpen” the image, you can pick him out significantly better. He seems to be naked as well (maybe 75% change that he is completely naked given a quick try at enhancing the picture). If someone did a really good job of enhancing that image, should we use that as evidence to convict him as well? What’s the cutoff? How hard does it have to be to pick someone out before we charge him with indecent exposure? Is magnifying the image by an unspecified amount OK but increasing contrast not OK? Care to propose any rules?

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Moby: what r you talking about? who told you they were taunted and humiliated?—oh wait…they did—they also lied about not having sex in public.

      If they broke the law (and they clearly did) they deserve to be arrested like every other law breaker. And if jail is uncomfortable for some, it is uncomfortable for all–no special treatment.

      YOU seem to be missing the point, which is that they committed a crime. you can’t say straight people would be treated differently as there are no examples in recent history of straight people fucking openly in the middle of the day on a boat docked close to shore for everyone to see. Look closely at the picture—the guy is pretty much looking at the people and getting off on it. They deserve to be humiliated because they literally behaved like freaks! fact is they were given special treatment. had they been local, they would have spent longer in jail and the really would have been taunted. these liars were actually driven everywhere by police escort and spent little of their remanded time in the cells. they didn’t get much of a fine either. what more do you want for these bad people? why are you claiming some special right for law breakers?

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @matt: “I know that I can do a lot of things here as a gay man that would not be accepted as readily in your country.”

      depends on where in america you go. america is a big place. and i am damn sure that gays cannot fuck in public in texas or anywhere. anyway there are lots of things that a black man can do here that would not be readily accepted in YOUR country–i.e. walk down the frigging street.

      your country isn’t heaven, and neither is mine. i’m glad we agree that d/ca isn’t the homophobic place it is being made out to be by those two liars.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @B: what are you smoking? lol! when the video inevitably shows up i wonder what you will say then? i think it funny the way you assume there is no video the same many assumed there was no photo. careful what u ask for.

      your buddies broke the law pal. plain and simple. that automatically involves a stint in prison, court appearance and conviction. it is not for you to tell a republic what laws to make or how to enforce them. i know you won’t get all i just wrote, cause as someone said—you’re a dummy, but…I’m a little bored at the moment and need to occupy my time somehow…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: I really feel like I’m in some sort of 60’s surreal psychedelic conversation now.

      I, and several other people, keep pointing out that this photo isn’t actually what got these men into trouble; they got into trouble because actual witnesses on the pier reported them to the police.

      But you keep insisting on the fine points of photography, and saying this photo wasn’t enough to convict them, as if this photograph actually had anything to do with the two men being arrested.

      It didn’t. Can that be made any clearer to you? This photograph is not the reason they were arrested. Stop arguing about the photograph.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @B:

      numerous people saw them having sex. those reports were made before this picture surfaced. not the other way around.

      You must therefore assume that they were having sex close enough to the shore for people to actually see them.

      your preoccupation with the photo is therefore baseless Re proof they should have been arrested. If you think you need more proof for yourself personally that they were having sex, well that is your business. At this point i don’t think anything would convince you.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      They were dissembling about the photo – it was not taken a good distance from the ship.

      This is partly a reply to No. 349, where Eric Auerbach wrote, “@B: Wow. It’s amazing. You just don’t get the very simple idea I’m trying to convey, …”

      Well Eric, here’s an example of why these details are important. Scroll up above to No. 209 where “i was on that cruise” claimed the picture was taken from either the end of the peer or from the middle of the peer. It was taken from the shore or very close to the shore. For proof look at Queerty’s photo http://queerty-prodweb.s3.amazonaws.com/wp/docs/2012/03/cruisers2a.jpg Then look at http://dominicanewsonline.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cruise-ship1.jpg which shows the ship in port. There is an orange object with windows on it just below their balcony. While only one shows in the dominicanewsonline site, there are in fact a number of these. If you save the image from dominicanewsonline and magnify it a lot, you can estimate how much of the balcony above them you can see, which will give you an idea of how far away the camera was. Eyeballing it, one would guess 150 to 200 feet, maybe more. It is pretty obvious that a lot of magnification was required inthe picture of the two that Queerty provided – just compare the two pictures. As to how visible they were, you’d get quite a different impression using one picture than the other.

      I did manage to find a satellite image of a dock in Roseau (the town where dominicanewsonline is located) and it is a good 250 feet long, maybe more. If the picture was taken from the middle of the peer, it would have been about 150 feet from
      the ship. At the shore, closer to 300 feet (if I found the right dock – this was the one best for walking into town). Just use google maps to see it.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: Uh. Without the CIB, there would be problems. And remember, the biggest pressure group on Dominica is coming from Great Britian.

      Did you add all the remittances from Dominican islanders living in the USA in that figure? I’ll bet you didn’t.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: Again, you don’t understand squat about people who actually have lived in anti-Gay environments and KNOW what real the impacts are. For the friggen record, I live in Houston, where we have an out lesbian Mayor.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @B: You’re still going on about the photograph. Good God. Go on your merry way, sir. We clearly have nothing to discuss.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: I have been on four Atlantis cruises. Including one last year that docked in St Lucia, a homophobic nation with the same law on the books as Dominica, Grenada, and Barbados. While there were multiple pleadings from Atlantis to keep nudity in your rooms, I don’t recall ANY statement regarding the legal situation on St Lucia last year. I was on the friggin cruise last year.

      Please let me know if anyone was told…”Its against the law to be gay in Dominica”. Not, please go on the official excursions… Not please keep nudity in the rooms..

      And I’m not defending Mr Mayer and Mr Hart. I’m just saying…why did Atlantis decide to go there. Why does Dominica insist on keeping a discriminatory law on its books that it says it will never enforce…Why do they insist on dismissing the impact of criminalization statues…and why the blank are they going to Russia this summer.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @z: Then get rid of the idiotic law then. Then I will STFU. The law, that Dominica clings to, is the problem. Repeal it and be done with it. If your nation is so friggin insistent that they’re gonna keep the law, then I’m going to have to conclude that there is some reason WHY that’s the case.

      Again, why do you keep the law on the books? No one has attempted to address that issue.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill:

      What’s the CIB? Are we making up acronyms now? Or do you mean the Caribbean Development Bank, i.e., the CDB? Which, of course, isn’t funded by the United States?

      As for remittances: What exactly is your point? That until Dominica repeals its anti-buggery laws, Dominicans in the US shouldn’t be allowed to work? Or that an embargo should be placed on financial transfers to Dominica? Please, finish that thought. I’m curious to see how far you’re willing to take this line of reasoning.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: Eric, where did you go to law school? Ross “University”?

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: ??

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DA me come from
      DA me come from [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Martin – I defended the United States in uniform for 24 years. Now – let me explain something to you. While you write slanderous statements about my homeland – Dominica, I would like to remind you that Dominican soldiers of the RAF in WWII helped liberate what you today call home – there was no fight in your weak ass countrymen as they gladly gave up everything to Nazi Germany and ran away. Freedom is not free – it came at a price to my countrymen and the allies, so you could prance and enjoy your freedoms of legalized porn, cannabis and whatever else is now legal in your country. Before you throw insults it would behoove you to learn your goddamn history. Out!!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Eric Auerbach: Sorry, I meant the CBI, the Caribbean Basin Initiative, which allows homophobic Caribbean states like Jamaica, Dominica, St Lucia, Grenada, TnT, Antigua, and Belize preferred access to the US market. That, along with the FTAA, should be sunset unless signatory nations abide by very basic human rights norms. Dominica should sell its patchouli to China if it doesn’t like it.

      By the way, once Sarko loses in the French elections this year, we’ll work with the Hollande government in France and others to place pressure on Dominica through the Francophonie and the EU.

      Look, this law has got to go. Just like it has to go in Belize, Jamaica, St Vincent, Grenada, Antigua, Trinidad and Tobago, and St Kitts.

      Dominica, how bad do you want to keep the law? If we need to put more pressure on you guys, we can work on that. Want visa restrictions (already a problem as a result of Dominica giving passports to any foreigner with a payment to government, regardless of security status, ties to the nation, and criminal record)? We can work on that. Want a tax on direct remitances? We can work on that. Want Dominica’s participation in the FTAA to be contingent on human rights metrics (as well as leaving ALBA – already a sore spot in US-Dominica relations)? We can work on that. Want additional requirements on US-Dominica trade (resulting from Dominica’s banking and business laws)? We can work on that.

      And remember, we can exert pressure on the UK, the Canadians,and the EU as well. There are many people, far more powerful than I am working on the issue of removal of criminalization statutes. Just keep insisting on keeping this law on the books, and understand there are many of us who really want to banish these laws from the books and are perfectly willing to establish exactly how far Dominica (or Grenada, or Belize, etc.) is willing to go to retain a law that they say will never be enforced.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric Auerbach
      Eric Auerbach

      @Houston Bill: Yeah, as I pointed out already, the US is actually a huge net winner in trade relations with Dominica. So I’m not sure what exactly it is you’re going on about.

      You seem to wish you had the power to crush the island of Dominica (which you seem to believe is tainted with some sort of homophobic “collective guilt,” even though the reasonable treatment the two Palm Beach imbeciles received belies such notions) through the might of US aid and trade.

      But (problem!) the US gives no direct aid to Dominica, and in terms of trade, it’s the US, and not Dominica, that benefits from the relationship (and that, by a HUGE margin). So enough. Really. Enough.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: Lol. it took 21 centuries for the US to finally allow gays in it’s military, let’s see how long it will take to convince the US to impose all those sanctions you seek on tiny Dominica for some non-enforced law. Lol oh deluded one. ideals of grandeur much!?! SMH

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: Ross is a medical school btw.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: why keep the law on yours? lol.and truly where is the outrage over your lying slandering countrymen?

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Houston Bill: ‘While there were multiple pleadings from Atlantis to keep nudity in your rooms, I don’t recall ANY statement regarding the legal situation on St Lucia last year”

      well they told you no nudity right? so what more do you want? are you an imbecile that you cannot figure out that public fucking just might be against the law. when does personal responsibility come in?

      btw you are a liar! it is not against the law to be gay in dominica. buggery between any of the sexes is technically against the law. the law is only enforced in cases of rape. but i’ve already said that.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Domi
      Domi

      @Houston Bill: If you dont like their laws just dont go there. I mean I dont like Floridas “I-can-stalk-you-and-shoot-you-dead-in-selfdefence law” so I shall not be going there again. I would also have a problem with my government having trade embargoes on Dominica because 1) everyone including LGBT and their allies in that country would suffer the resulting economy 2) patriotic fervour would poison the environment for reform, it would get much worse for LGBT before it got better.
      No Bill, the best thing is to keep POOR ambassadors like these two idiots away from such places and support LGBT groups. The one good thing about your post is finally realising that a US pullout without the support of EU or China would have little impact now. The sun really has set on that empire.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Richie
      Richie

      I for one think Dominica is beautiful as are its people and i look forward to visiting again. I am fully certisfied that the law is only rarely envoked and then its to deal with male on male rape. Like the many places (including US states) that have those laws, change will eventually blow through with or without me. *already dreaming of that hammock*

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • z
      z

      @Richie: not just male on male rape. it has to do with female rape as well. any rape of the anus regardless of sex or sexual orientation basically.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 5:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charlie
      Charlie

      @Pedro: Wait a few years, you little shit. It’ll seem like a few weeks before you’re 35. Yesterday you were 21 in club. And you’ll still feel 21. You always FEEL 21. So pray that you don’t have those cherubic fairy-boy good looks, cause those looks don’t age at ALL. Those looks get puffy and fat and stupid looking. Pray you have a good jawline, decent cheekbones and a good beard. Oh and pray that you’re interesting, cause when your rent-boy looks desert you, you’d better be funny and passionate and interesting and educated. Or you’ll be nothing.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 5:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Katrina Swales
      Katrina Swales

      It was against the local laws, and to be honest just as illegal in most places, and they know that, they showed they knew that by lieing about it, trying to make a public indescency issue into a big LGBT issue. YES how they were treated after is a LGBT issue, the actual arrest, is not so.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 8:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barbie
      Barbie

      Straight or Gay some things should remain in private therefore exposing yourselves in public view like this is just wrong

      Apr 1, 2012 at 9:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Boyd
      Boyd

      There you are you see … Cretinism isn’t purely a heterosexual problem :)

      Apr 1, 2012 at 9:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pedro
      Pedro

      @Charlie: Umm…I intend to live a heteronormative lifestyle, so I won’t care what I look at at 35, I’ll be an old married man by then with a couple of kids…I don’t intend to be one of those desperate middle-aged gays still prowling gay bars or grindr looking for the next trick. I was raised a good Catholic boy. I have a boyfriend that loves me, hopefully we’ll spend the rest of our lives together, we share the same conservative values. We’ve met each other’s parents and everything.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 9:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JJ
      JJ

      I KNEW IT!!! As soon as this story first came out my first thought was they were fucking in plain view for the world to see!!! Now thanks to these to idiots the right wings nuts have just been given more fuel to add to the fire!! Thank you very much you two dumb asses for totally making us all look like freaks, perverts and depraved sickos!! I think public sex is as hot as the next person how ever I also know when and where it is appropriate! I still think how they were treated was wrong but now after seeing this pic I certainly don’t feel anywhere as near as bad for them as I did before!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 10:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ESNKY
      ESNKY

      To those who say …”Gay travelers should avoid homophobic countries” People who chose to break the laws of the countries they are visiting should avoid those countries! I was in Dominica for nearly 4 hours and NEVER once experienced homphobia directed toward me or the other’s who were on my excurusion (two bus loads of gay men).

      Apr 1, 2012 at 11:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF
      WTF

      I was on the cruise and we got off the ship and walked around Dominica and it was a nice place. We had lunch at a restaurant near the port and the locals were friendly and glad to see us. These two guys from Palm Springs, CA are IDIOTS, plain and simple! They knew exaclty what they were doing when they chose to have sex on their balcony while in port and were looking for attention and got it (the photo says it all). They are lucky they didn’t pull this stunt while in the United States or they would now be on the sex offender list! What disgusts me the most about these two guys is that they had the nerve to come back to the United States and start lying about what really took place and one is a retired Police Officer, which makes it that much worse. They owe the Island of Dominica an apology; They owe all of us on the cruise an apology; and they owe the public an apology. I have been on 10 Atlantis cruises and whether the laws are for gays or against gays, the locals of all the islands we have visited have been nothing but friendly to us.
      On a side note…I wonder with this new evidence and the trouble that this two jackasses have caused, if Dominica will issue an arrest warrant for lying to the Judge? We have double jeopardy in this country so they can’t be tried twice but it would be interesting if Dominica issued an arrest warrant for these two men so each time they tried to travel outside the US they would risk getting arrested and sent back to Dominica to stand trial for HAVING SEX on their balcony while in port for EVERYONE to see, including children? Would be interesting…. more interesting if the US were to hand them back over. Lastly, since we are now learning that these two guys are liars, I am willing to bet you they are liars when it comes to the conditions in Dominica they stated and how they were treated. I mean come on, how can we believe anything they say now…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 11:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SoCal
      SoCal

      Wonder what satisfaction Eric Auerbach got any any of his diatribe?? last comment proves more than enough. Being a local resident, what I really wonder is if these Palm Springs guys have read any of the publicity from beginning todate? Will be curious just how they are dealing with their exploits, if nothing else Palm Springs is a small town living in wicked gossip that opens and closes by example restaurants overnight. Cannot wait to see and listen from either around this small town.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gossip Gay
      Gossip Gay

      Here’s the deal — It’s a gay cruise. And if you’ve been on it, you know the back sun deck or the Solarium. It is what it is and, we, as a culture have accepted this. HOWEVER, on the balcony and IN port? It’s almost as if they were TRYING to make controversy. Do it on the sundeck, boys…like any respectable gay! XOXOXO, gossip gay

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i was on the cruise
      i was on the cruise

      @B:

      That is not a picture of the ship in the Port of Roseau. The pier in Roseau IS NOT concrete. God, you’re a moron.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF
      WTF

      @SoCal: Palm Springs is VERY small town. I would be surprised if they could really show their faces after all of this. I am also sure that whatever Police Department this guy retired from is NOT happy about hearing that he is a liar and having sex on a balcony. If I were them, I would apologize for everything and go into hiding for a long time until this blows over.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dvlaries
      dvlaries

      Time for Miss Manners again, who gave the last word on this sort of vulgarity, back when Janet Jackson’s breast popped out on the Super Bowl.

      ” … Miss Manners is willing to grant that standards about what constitutes vulgarity are relative and subjective. She knows that repetition wears away the shock, so that allowing vulgarity to take its own course eventually renders it unexceptional. And she yields to no one in her opposition to censorship and the abridgment of rights.

      Nevertheless, she cannot help noticing that not everything natural is good. Earthquakes, for example. And she fails to see the benefit to anyone if natural human functions, even ones that produce beneficial results — she is much too delicate to name them — are on public view.

      That some like to observe or be observed does not strike her as a reason for arranging for the disinclined to do so when they are going about their normal business. And that some things may be delightful in one context and shocking in another is not a contradiction that should trouble anyone with a modicum of sophistication.

      Vulgarity is one of those lapses of manners that do not arise from accident or ignorance. Whether it is showing off or showing too much, it is done to provoke others to envy or disgust. So while allowing it to become commonplace helps dull the reaction, it forces down the standards with which everyone else has to live.

      Now we get to the tricky part. How do you shield some people without suppressing others?

      By custom. The mannerly principle of not deliberately provoking others, which is the foundation of civilized living, supplies a sense of etiquette about what is permissible where. If you attend orgies, you cannot complain of indecency; if you stumble upon the same activities in the grocery store aisles, you should. The vulgar have their venues and should not expect to be allowed to set the tone everywhere.”

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pickles
      Pickles

      Some folks need to find out what “pedophilia” actual is and stop slinging words around like they have no meaning.

      The U.S. is the only developed country that still believes that the mere sight of consenting adults engaged in sexual activity will cause a psychotic break in a child.

      Most children wouldn’t even know what they were looking at and if they are WITH their parents, seems pretty simple to me to say “Those two men are having sex but they shouldn’t be doing it outside because that’s impolite and it’s something that should be private between adults”

      Done!

      The same thing a parent would do if their kid saw some other thing they didn’t understand.

      I never said giving them a fine for indecent exposure was inappropriate. I said taking them off the ship, arresting them and holding them over night was homophobic overkill.

      If they had simply given them a fine and let them pay it and this story would have never become the big rigmarole that it has.

      People do stupid things when it comes to sex (adults, teens, drunk or sober, it happens). It doesn’t make them criminals or immoral. Sex is sex. As long as it’s consensual and not hurting anyone we need to STOP slut-shaming folks about it.

      Threatening to put them in jail for the KIND of sex they were having is a completely other thing.

      I can’t control the laws in any other country or state in which I do not live.

      But I’m also not going to pretend that something ISN’T HOMOPHOBIC when I know it is.

      If sodomy is outlawed then so should every other kind of sex act.

      The reason sodomy is EVER outlawed is because of the presumption that it’s gay men who are participating in the sodomizing.

      I do know this, the Federal Government of the US has overridden anti-sodomy laws

      Lawrence v. Texas, 2003

      So I don’t care how many backwards legislatures WANT to make gay men criminals for having consensual sex in the privacy of their own homes, they can’t. Tough titty.

      This kind of hysteria around sex is the reason why we now have so many people registered as “Sex offenders” (whether they were jerking off in their parked car or actually molesting another human being) that people are being groups into homeless villages on the outskirts of towns and cities so they don’t violate proximity rules.

      I don’t live in Dominica. I don’t have to like or support its laws.

      Hell, I don’t even like or support many of the laws in the country where I am an actual citizen.

      But the idea that folks here can actually believe that the treatment of these two men is well deserved, just boggles my mind.

      Yes, they shouldn’t have been on their balcony and yes it’s unfortunate a few passersby saw them and stopped to check out the show. And? Big whoop.

      Let he/she who has NEVER had sex in a place where he/she shouldn’t have, cast the first stone!

      All the hazarai about something that should just be a silly thing no worse than jay walking or a parking ticket and an embarrassing funny story to tell their friends back home has suddenly becomes “WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?!!!” “Brand them, they’re hussies!” “American suck!”.

      Ridiculous.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WMW
      WMW

      @Charlie:

      Well put, Sir. Pedro doesn’t appear to’ve made much headway in the “educated”, “interesting”, or “funny” departments. All he’s doing is exposing his own hangups, ignorance, and ego. I guess it’d be OK for him if the guys screwing publicly were both his “type”, since he can’t or won’t address the real issues here.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry
      Larry

      pedro…one day you will be an old fart too and you will be shit out of luck because your personality sucks and your body will sag

      Apr 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      I do agree with dviaries here, there’s such a thing as good manners & knowing the appropriate place to do something. I do think though there’s a difference between sex on a balcony attached to your room several hundred feet away & sex in the middle of the public square. While both public, one you can turn your head away from one & the other you’re practically tripping over them so no, I don’t think there was damage done to the hypothetical possible children.

      I agree with Pickles–lots of over reaction & over kill in the punishment. Atlantis has repeated several times that they worked to negotiate so the couple would pay a fine & be flown out of there immediately. The Dominican officials said no. They’re the ones that made this into even more of a public spectacle than it needed to be so therefore needs to own the publicity, bad or good that came as a result.

      They wanted to make an example of these men even though I’ve read several comments by Dominicans that have said during Carnivale there, there’s many acts of lewd conduct & straight couple sex & sexual activities between two women in which no arrests are made. So the men may not be entirely wrong in surmising their arrest were due to them being two gay men. But when you’re doing something wrong in the first place, it’s hard to complain & get people’s sympathy.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pedro
      pedro

      @WMW: What are the real issues; two whores, one in his 40’s, the other in his 50’s decided to commit sodomy, out in the open in front of a dock full of onlookers, including children. Is that what you want me to address? Well here goes: I find it nauseating and am just saddened that these two freaks were not incarcerated for a longer period, than the two days they did spend in that third world prison. I think older generations of gay men are sick in the head. There’s a piece in the New York Times about some vain idiot in his 40’s who took his own life because as a gay man he couldn’t see any future for himself, after spending his youth in loose relationships where the physical trumped everything else. As I stated before, I hope that my generation does a better job of it than the old gays, because God knows that they screwed it up. Yours is a world of AIDS, open relationships and promiscuity. YOur role models are porn stars, LOL, is there any more that need be said…As far as my intelligence, I did fairly well on my MCAT’s and am waiting for medical school. I will concede that I’m not that interesting though…As I stated above, I look forward to a dull “heteronormative” life with my boyfriend…I will repeat that old men should not be doing the nasty in public like that, it makes me sick to my stomach. My dad’s in his late 40’s, the thought of him naked having sex out in the open with my mom, oh my God, the inhumanity!! But I guess when you refuse to conform, and turn your nose up at traditional family values (no kids ergo no grandkids to fulfill your older years), sex on a cruise ship is all the thrills you’ve got left…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Domi: 10 percent of the Dominican population lives as immigrants in the USA. I seriously doubt you are counting remittances in that matter. Jus sayin’

      I’m gonna leave it here. My final points

      1) Atlantis is being irresponsible for going to anti-Gay countries.
      2) I think its obvious from the comments that Dominica has no intention of reforming its law that supposedly will never be used against Gay people. They are an anti-Gay nation. Period.
      3) The picuture of Mr Hart and Mr Mayer appears to be conclusive to me insofar as proof that they were behaving inappropriately.
      4) If Dominica wishes to ruin its relations with its real trading partners (as opposed to China – who basically gave them a bunch of money for a road in return for selling their support in the UN Gen Assembly), they are welcome to do so. You can chose to keep the law on the books, or you can choose to have good relations with your large trading partners. Dominica, Grenada, St Kitts, Jamaica, Belize, Guyana, St Vincent, Antigua, and St Lucia…the time when you can enjoy both good relations with the West and criminalization legislation of Gay persons is coming to an end. Choose wisely.

      Peace.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hot Silver Daddy
      Hot Silver Daddy

      Unacceptable, not possible to think a police officer it will do this knowingly the incriminating behave!!
      PLESASE DON?T MAKE ANY HARDER THE ISSUE and mid thinking that we are nuts!1 this it is nuts!!
      Small fine for what he did to our community!!!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WMW
      WMW

      @pedro:

      Bring it all you want; I’m not buying it. You remain pretty clueless about the complex social, diplomatic, and ethical ramifications of the initial topic. Most glaringly, you seem utterly ignorant of your own character. It all boils down to some notion that you’re special and superior, that you owe nothing of of your privilege to the activists who came before you, and that your position is airtight.

      Thus your ageist vitriol can’t possibly be narrow-minded, stupid and offensive. That you think the guys involved are old and ugly, we get that. Because it’s really ALL you’ve been able to mention, again and again. Your effort to explain it further just digs you a deeper hole, and bodes ill for your hopes of maintaining a grown-up, long-term commitment, and of aging with any kind of grace. And, before you go painting me with a broad brush:

      I’m 50 and married to the love of my life for 12 years. We care for our health, and our appearance, out of common self-respect. Not because we’re trying to stay 25. Nor are we invisible, ugly, and undesirable to our real friends and, apparently, to the (often much younger) men that hit on us on the rare occasions we’re out. But we don’t really give a damn if that happens or not, because we remain beautiful and desirable to each other. Once upon a time I was (if I believe what I’ve been told) gorgeous, fashionable, and just plain hot. Fortunately, I had older Gay Men and Lesbians as friends who were in a position to kick my ass about the need to develop my brain, and at least try to cultivate a humility and compassion that you’re entirely without.

      if you live long enough, you’ll be 30, then 50, in what will seem like the blink of an eye. Your arrogance and your judgment of others will only do you harm. How will you deal with turning into something you hate so much? Not a practitioner of public sex (if you go back and read anything I wrote there, you’ll know I’m not giving these dudes a pass at all) but just…older. It sure as hell won’t enhance a loving partnership.

      That said, I wish you luck on your journey.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW
      KyleW

      @WMW: The things you said about your life with your partner were beautiful.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pedro
      pedro

      @WMW: “ageist vitriol”…? I simply stated that I don’t find men my dad’s age attractive and I don’t think old men should be having sex in public.I also stated that from all I have seen, older gay men are sick in the head, but that isn’t ageism, just an observation. I would hardly call that vitriol. Yes, one day I will be in my 30’s and guess what? I certainly won’t spend it taking nasty sex cruises. I admit it, gay culture makes me sick, I find it lacking in any virtue and quite sad. I have tried to find something good in it, but quite frankly, I haven’t. Just as an example, I had heard some older gays talking about that silly movie, Love, Valor, Compassion, how it was so amazing and touching. Well, I finally found it on YouTube, and it was the most vapid piece of shit I have ever forced myself to watch…A worthless film about a bunch of vapid, promiscuous losers, some of whom were dying from AIDs, big freaking deal! I prefer the values of my parents, who’ve been faithfully married for 25 years.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WMW
      WMW

      @KyleW:

      Thank you.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WMW
      WMW

      @pedro:

      That’s nice, dear. Self-examination is a virtue too. With that, I take leave of the matter, and wish you well.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      BTW, don’t forget the other guy in Queerty’s picture – the guy one floor higher and a room to the left. If you adjust the contrast and do some filtering to “sharpen” the image, you can pick him out significantly better.

      Not true. I used photo software to try to do it, but it’s not possible. In any case, even if the man one floor higher was naked, it’s a whole lot different than standing outside on his balcony screwing.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      while that photo does seem incriminating, i’m not sure you can actually see the sex happening. They definitely are breaking nudity laws, if they exist. But I’m not certain about the sex because of the black bar. If I was too jump to a conclusion, which one shouldn’t do, I would state they were guilty. But again, this photo is not 100% proof. Maybe the black bar is covering the penis insertion. If that’s true… well, they are undeserving of the many LGBT who trusted them and believed their lies and it’s pretty messed up and stupid on their part.

      @pedro: Wow. Between this post and your previous ones. I’m at a loss for words. I think, all I can say is how sad your posts are. I want to say I wish that in your future you’ll get some nice life lessons and we get some schadenfreude, but that wouldn’t be very nice. Altho, I can’t say you have been too nice in your comments as well.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      I have been on four Atlantis cruises. Including one last year that docked in St Lucia, a homophobic nation with the same law on the books as Dominica, Grenada, and Barbados. While there were multiple pleadings from Atlantis to keep nudity in your rooms, I don’t recall ANY statement regarding the legal situation on St Lucia last year. I was on the friggin cruise last year.

      You know, if you’re as much of a front-lines activist as your commentary would imply, How about doing your own research?

      Seems to me that Atlantis did its duty with the “multiple pleadings to keep nudity in your rooms.” They’re a cruise line, not a floating law school. If you’re so concerned with the gay rights situation in these countries, I’d think you in particular would’ve done your research before taking those cruises. Yet you went anyway. Not just once, but four times.

      But now you turn around and blame Atlantis? What are you, a baby? Or just another hypocrite?

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pedro
      pedro

      @scott ny’er: Please give examples of my nasty posts. Am I so insensitive or are you hyper-sensitive? I do not believe that I have said anything, that I would consider cruel or nasty.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @pedro, I hear ya. At least some of what you’re saying is stuff I thought when I was in my 20s, minus the vitriol about the older gays. See, when I was that age, you really didn’t see that many older gays. They were pretty much hidden away. The gay culture was much more youth- and looks-oriented than it is today. And there was a gigantic chasm between the pre-gay lib older guys and us. So, you really didn’t see as many older guys.

      Anyway, trust me, there’s plenty of sin to go around. “The youth” don’t take HIV seriously enough, because the retrovirals have convinced too many of you that HIV is no big deal. And the use of party drugs among “the youth” is just sky high. By contrast, if you’ve made it much past the age of 50 today, chances are higher that you’ve avoided a bunch of the traps like drugs and barebacking.

      Like any generalizations, mine are just that: generalizations. I’ve met meth users in their 50s, and clean-living fellas in their 20s. If you play your cards right and manage to stick to your ideals, you’ll make it to my grand old age of 55. And sure as day follows night, some 20-something will be saying stupid things, and you’ll try to come up with an intelligent answer that begins with, “I hear ya.”

      Put it this way, Pedro. We old dudes have all been 22, but you haven’t been 55. It doesn’t make us smarter, but it does make us more experienced. When you’re finished ranting, you might stop to consider that you just might have a thing or two to learn. Ask politely, and maybe someone will pass along some information you can use.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Houston Bill
      Houston Bill

      @Looked In: Yes, I participated in four Atlantis events. The first three were Mexico only events. I have no issue with Mexico. On my last cruise, I failed to do my own resarch when it went to St Lucia (as one stop on a cruise). Shame on me for not doing my research better then. Once on the boat, I decided that I would at least not get off the boat in St Lucia. I still ended up paying them some port fees. Shame on me. But I certainly am not going to compound the issue by continuing to patronize Atlantis. Now I know better. At the end of that cruise, I was appalled to learn that Atlantis would be going to Grenada, Barbados, and Dominica, three anti-Gay cruises on one cruise. Furthermore, I’m appalled to discover that Atlantis goes to Russia and moreover, continutes to discount the impact of anti-gay legilsation in the nations they visit, especially as how it relates to the local LGBT populations in the nations Atlantis chooses to patronize.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • evji108
      evji108

      @Axel Rod: @Looked In:

      These two men did what they did because allowing all those on the dock to watch was a big exhibitionist turn-on. Nobody has anal intercourse on a balcony in front of a bunch of people by accident. They, no doubt, felt immune from consequences because of the anonymity and protective distance of being on a ship. Something tells me they learned their lesson.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Please give examples of my nasty posts. Am I so insensitive or are you hyper-sensitive? I do not believe that I have said anything, that I would consider cruel or nasty.

      You’ve made quite plain your disdain for older gay people. There’s no point in quoting your posts. Look, I do understand. When I was in my 20s, the older guys I did meet seemed like they were on a different planet. Show tunes, piano bars, and attempts to appear younger than they really were. I get it, pedro. Believe me, I do.

      I’ve hesitated to comment on your posts for a couple of reasons. One is that your hyperbole is so far over the top that I’m not sure a rational reply will accomplish anything. Another is that I don’t want to come across as defensive, or worse yet, to get into a bitch contest here. A third reason is that I’ve actually been chuckling at times at your attempts to make people feel bad for being older and (to you) unattractive and undesirable. You don’t realize it, but there’s some self-parody in what you’ve been writing.

      I’ll take the risk of saying this much: If the wish fairy landed and gave me three of them, my list would not include the restoration of my youth. Life right now has never been better. I wish you well. Having been a snot-nosed brat in my time, I figure you’ll mellow out. You’ll have to. Oh, and along the way, every now and then, make sure to pause and appreciate the moment. When you get older, you’ll look back and realize that life is really a series of those moments, and that our stories are how we connect them.

      Good luck, pedro. Honest.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @evji108, I agree. A cruise ship does tend to be its own little world, and from the descriptions of the gay cruises I think that might get compounded. Throw in some “rich American privilege,” add some party drugs, and you have a recipe for serious embarrassment, or worse.

      I do hope that those Dominicans who have been looking in here and elsewhere are realizing that John Hart and Dennis Mayer are not winning any popularity contests in the U.S. gay community for their thoroughly obnoxious conduct. They got exactly what they deserved, and I trust that plenty of people in Palm Springs will be giving them the same message.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pedro
      pedro

      @Looked In: Again, the superficiality of gay men comes through, you’ve honed onto the age thing, and the fact that I don’t find older men attractive, and will not address the issues that I’ve brought up…So freaking sad…Is this shallowness genetic, I hope not! I don’t find older men attractive, because of the disgusting culture they perpetuate, because of their desperate obsession of holding onto their long lost youth, because of their lack of family values…Go take a look at the arresting photos of the two whores who decided to have sex in full view of the Dominican public, if that’s not pathetic, then I don’t know what is…They are perfect representatives of gay men of a certain age and generation.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @pedro: Dont mind pedro. He is a psychopath with a neurotic relationship to his sexuality. “I want to live a heteronormative life” He is a homo who is disgusted with himself for falling short of his own ambition.

      Dont worry life has lots of bitter disappointment in store for him. Will his boyfriend continue to find him attractive when he is 40 (mexicans dont age well…ewww), or will he continue to find his boyfriend hot when he is 40? Its a bit of a crunch either way… we can picture the sad 40 year old drooling over boys that could be his son (eewww again). Boys who are disgusted at the thought of being touched by him. We can see him drooling over the porn sites, satisfying himself because sex with hubby just aint intresting, it just sucks… How is it with family values now eh?

      It is hilarious to see this self-proclaimed macho scream his fears into cyberspace. He is so afraid he has a compulsion to come here and make other gays feel inferior because theyre old or dont have a bf, so he can feel good. Well that fear dont go away for long. His life is hell already. Shit scared of the future, self-hating and powerless to do anything about the slow rot life has in store for him…

      This is the gift life gives to those who do not embrace it, but has all kinds of reservations and demands. Pedro drinks deep and for those who want they can laugh at his futile squirming…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 5:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pedro
      pedro

      @Martin: You made me laugh…for the record I’m only half Mexican (half Argentinian)…and most person’s named Pedro, are actually not Mexican at all…I have no desire to make anyone feel inferior…by the way, Martin etes-vous francais? I know that you’re European, since you’re constantly bashing the U.S. as a backward hellhole, and I do speak un petit peu de francais, perhaps we could correspond…And my french will get better. By the way, I don’t watch porn, so I won’t be doing any drooling over it. As for my boyfriend, he’s black, they don’t crack, LOL!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 5:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • missedgle
      missedgle

      OMG, Just Obtuse,This is why middle American’s have a problems with us,come on guys.When u know better u gotta do better..SHAME SHAME SHAME

      Apr 1, 2012 at 5:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @missedgle: Désolé mon cheri. Je suis danois, pas francais. Mais j’aime aussi parler francais… c’est rigolo ca…

      Im not old myself but like i said, i study psychology, and you need to be careful man!

      Life needs to embraced and enjoyed. Living is an art. Make the most of you are given, and steer with care when the waters are troubled. Life is a dynamic, it has phases. Enjoy your first half. Fuck like a rabbit and make a shitload of money, but in the second half. Give something back to your community. That is the chief joy of the later years. Old people are sad only when they are materialistic and try for eternal youth.

      Dont say anything if you dont have anything nice to say about people. Hurting people with less confidence is easy, but not great!

      Bisou

      Martin

      Apr 1, 2012 at 6:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Martin
      Martin

      @pedro: It was for pedro…

      Désolé mon cheri. Je suis danois, pas francais. Mais j’aime aussi parler francais… c’est rigolo ca…

      Im not old myself but like i said, i study psychology, and you need to be careful man!

      Life needs to embraced and enjoyed. Living is an art. Make the most of you are given, and steer with care when the waters are troubled. Life is a dynamic, it has phases. Enjoy your first half. Fuck like a rabbit and make a shitload of money, but in the second half. Give something back to your community. That is the chief joy of the later years. Old people are sad only when they are materialistic and try for eternal youth.

      Dont say anything if you dont have anything nice to say about people. Hurting people with less confidence is easy, but not great!

      Bisou

      Martin

      Apr 1, 2012 at 6:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jj
      jj

      I think its time to close this thread queerty.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 8:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FunMe
      FunMe

      That self-hating fag, yup cuz that’s what he is, writes:

      “I was raised a good Catholic boy.”

      Catholic … enough said.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 8:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FunMe
      FunMe

      Queerty: can you close comments and move on to the next topic? I mean the over 400 replies really are just conversations/debates/whatever among the same people.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 8:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Richie
      Richie

      Why are some posts being deleted? Quite trying to control the debate Queerty. The majority of us are offended by this behaviour and the lying!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 8:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SoCal
      SoCal

      Missed most of the day here, looks more like personal attacks rather than ‘talking’ the issue posted by Queerty incriminating Photo Of Couple Arrested On Gay Cruise. Appears the subject is talked out on Advocate.com

      In my opinion and my limited experience for having sex upright – looking at the photo and playing with it, the bodies posture and positioning of limbs and bodies up against the terrace wall give the me impression something sexual is happening. If I was above or below onboard or on dock side, I’d stop, look and listen.

      Today as usual met with a few buddies for coffee, most of conversation was about the guys. Of the 8-locals, all believe the guys did a plea just to get out of Dominica as easy and as quickly as possible under their attorney’s advice — including to lessen the unwanted worldwide publicity. Not that the guys did not deserve being arrested. The guys seem not to be seen or heard from them.

      Understand we live 5-doors apart. If correct, all the drapes are drawn, no graffiti, no welcome mat and no red carpet. Guess I need to walk my dog more often and do the ‘neighborhood watch’ chief duties a bit more frequently [without any arms]…

      Apr 1, 2012 at 9:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Understand we live 5-doors apart. If correct, all the drapes are drawn, no graffiti, no welcome mat and no red carpet.

      Could you be a little more coherent? What does the “if correct” part mean? If you’re correct that you live “5-doors apart?” How would you not know? And if you don’t know, why would you say “5-doors apart?”

      Apr 1, 2012 at 9:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SoCal
      SoCal

      Coherent? A neighbor whom I have known for some time is one of my coffee drinking buds and he shared with me about several our neighbors. I recently moved into this neighborhood community in last 3-months, also quickly drafted onto several community boards. One of several reasons I do not know quite a few is that I have not had opportunity to met or introduced myself to the 60-home community.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 10:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rick
      rick

      Given that these guys lied about the extent of their “exposure” on the balcony, why does anyone still believe their dramatic story of persecution?

      These guys are not credible. Sleaze.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 10:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      @rick: Because it’s not been disputed by any of the locals. Someone who took the cruise wrote on the Atlantis facebook about a fellow cruiser who had someone wave a knife at them while shouting anti gay slurs etc. And slurs were shouted at people at the cruise waiting in line. It’s not hard to believe they faced a lot of hostility. They were arrested by the military police not traffic cops.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 10:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      correction: Anti gay slurs were shouted at a group waiting in line for an excursion.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 10:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • vicky
      vicky

      ITS SICK ANS STUPID TO HAVE SEX IN PUBLIC,THEY WERE CLEARLY OUT OF LINE,THEY DESERVE EVERYTHING THEY GET.

      Apr 1, 2012 at 11:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • R Lebeau
      R Lebeau [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Houston Bill,

      I enjoyed seeing these countries. If you wont spend any money in homophobic countries, I’m assuming you don’t spend money in most places in the U.S. I accept the reality that some places aren’t accepting of men kissing and holding hands. I was a guest in their country. I’m not trying to go there and change their way of thinking,….not gonna happen. But I conduct myself in a proper and appropriate manner.

      I’m not going to to to a dinner party and fuck on the table even if I do that at home. Time and place.

      And to the argument about the telephoto lens and etc, deck 5 was almost level with the port, it’s like 3 floors above. Even if they weren’t actually fucking, that’s what it looked like. Bill Clinton nonwithstanding, if it looks like sex, it’s close enough under the law. Try pulling that shit on times square in front of Planet Hollywood, let’s see how gay friendly nypd is.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 12:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF
      WTF

      @rick: I am totally with you on this. I was on the cruise and got off in port and we walked all around the town and ate lunch there and nobody said or did anything to us because we were gay. The locals were very friendly. The person who said something about what is the big deal and only a few people saw is not very bright. There are hundreds of people in port from locals to people getting off the boat. There are businesses right there in port that were two stories high and can see everything going on. There is no excuse to have sex in public on a busy port where they knew everyone can see and not to mention he is looking down at the people when he was photographed. I don’t believe any of their story on how they were treated, as they were just trying to get more attention for themselves. They should count their blessings they are not locked up in Dominica. They are a disgrace to not only the gay community but to ALL Americans for making us look like fools. Show some respect and class when visiting another country!!

      Apr 2, 2012 at 12:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @pedro:

      I find it quite disturbing that you plan to be a doctor. Doctors have to have compassion and sympathy to work with your patients. Plus a positive personality take on the problems your patients have and provide them with support. You don’t appear to have any of these traits

      Please tell all of us when you are a doctor and where you’re practising, because those of us who are ugly old men probably wouldn’t want to be your patients as you’d euthanize us for being so disgusting when we just came in for a chest cold .

      And one last thing, you seriously need to improve your self esteem because quoting on here about your loving boyfriend and plans for a “heternormative” life style [AKA: living a closeted life in the suburbs as a self loathing homosexual] Internalized homophobia and hatred for your fellow gay brothers indicates some baggage you have. A therapist can help you with your internalized homophobia. You will need to address this if you plan to become a dr as frankly by your postings, you seem to have some hatred against any gay man over 40 who doesn’t emulate your evangelical, closeted pure as the driven snow lifestyle you lead.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 2:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @pedro: One more thing. You mentioned how all older gay men have aids. That’s not quite true. You’re obviously too young to understand what happened in the 80’s and 90’s. This disgusting older generation of men who you hate went thru something you missed; a huge part of an entire generation of gay men dying.

      You do realize that the highest rates of new HIV infections are occurring in your “were so much better than the old fags: generation at a much higher rate than older men. We watched all our friends die, we understand the implication.

      Your generation on the other hand has no problem with unprotected sex because the meds that have come out when you were sprouting pubes give the “ILLUSION” that HIV is managable disease

      Here is a quote from http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm Read it and you will find that your “oh so much better generation than the old gay guys” are seroconverting at a higher rate than any other demographic in the gay community.

      Here’s a quote from the article. Maybe it will help you realize that your generation isn’t vastly superior to all the old aids infected gay men you have so much loathing for:

      =====
      In the USA, the UK, and a number of other European countries, HIV and AIDS have affected young gay men more than any other group of people. In the UK and USA especially, the percentage of young gay men who have been infected with HIV and the percentage with AIDS is much higher than other groups such as heterosexual people or children.

      POT. KETTLE. BLACK

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      It seems like this photo shows how far the ship is from the land. That’s kind of far for the naked eye to see stuff going on. I mean, I’ve seen sex acts and naked people through windows of buildings in Manhattan and Barcelona, does that mean those people should be arrested too? I think, there is a reasonable thought that if you’re far enough away and people can’t see you, what’s the harm.

      I’m not sure I would do it but still. I think you’d need a telephoto lens or binoculars to see any alleged sex acts. I’m not saying it’s right and they were on the balcony, so that is more public than inside but I think there are some other facts that should be considered as well, no?

      http://js-kit.com/blob/M5CjqApVfzmrsrIbSyBOmb.jpg

      Apr 2, 2012 at 12:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry
      Larry [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @jason: I have been on 15 Atlantis cruises and they have never encouraged public sex acts. Do they happen? Rarely. I have viewed thousands of Atlantis promotional materials and have never seen a sex act, public or private, included. Those who have no experience should not comment falsely.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 12:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Purcell
      Paul Purcell

      Looks like they have bathing suits on, and not sure from this if I could, with complete certainty, say what they are really doing. Interesting how we all see different things from the same picture. If they were having intercourse, then, yep, that’s wrong. However, I was on the cruise and friends who left the ship said the locals were NOT inviting. My buddies were on land for 15 minutes and were made to feel unsafe. I still ask why we would use our dollars to visit ports where we know full well their beliefs.

      And, I smile at the holier than thou comments. I’m not sure I know a single person who hasn’t done something stupid in their lifetimes….multiple times, in fact. They read as though some of you are just too perfect.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 1:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul Purcell
      Paul Purcell

      One more thing: I can’t believe the way we speak to on another here. What happened to being civil? We’re all entitled to our opinions, but come on, guys.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 1:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF
      WTF

      @scott ny’er: Hi Scott, you were not on the cruise and I was on the cruise. You can see all of the rooms VERY clearly from the port/dock. It may seem far to you but it is not when you are there. I was there and passengers and staff from the cruise ship complained about what was taking place as well as locals. I am surprised that you would find it okay for people to go out on their balcony and have sex right there in port knowing everyone can see them and he even looks down at the peopel while he is being photographed. It is tasteless and if that happened here in the United States, they would be arrested and on the sex offender list. I am sure if your parents were in port and saw this your children in your family, they would NOT think it was okay. Just because you are gay doesn’t give you the right to have sex in public and get away with it, especially while visiting another country. I am also surprised you think it is okay they lied about what they did and came back to the US saying they NEVER had sex on their balconies. They are liars and I hope they are NOT allowed back on an Atlantis cruise ever again. I don’t feel anyone should be defending their actions, as there is no valid excuse for what they did and then to lie about it after the fact.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      @WTF: Whoa. There seems to be some anger behind them words. First, I never said I was or wasn’t on the ship… you assumed that. It’s not a good thing to assume things. Like this picture… it’s not 100% proof. Like it or not, it’s not. Remove the black bar and show me penis insertion. Or let’s see more pics or video of alleged sex.

      Now, let’s say I believe you and that you were on the cruise and that you can see everything from the dock. How would I know you could see the balconies from the dock if I didn’t go on the dock? Would it be be smart to assume that it’s possible? Yes. But, not everyone is smart. It does seem like you and a lot of other people are thinking these two had malicious intent. IF, they were smart AND knew they could be seen from the dock AND did have sex, then yes, I don’t think that’s a good idea.

      I’m also less brainwashed by America and it’s Christian puritan views and more open about nudity and views on sex. And it has nothing to do with being gay. So, if you knew me and my thinking you wouldn’t be surprised that I’m ok with people having sex on their balconies if they think they won’t be seen. What my parents think, is what my parents think. I’m not my parents.

      Now, let’s see if from another perspective. Assuming they were having sex. They didn’t know they could be seen. They thought it might be cool and did it. Are they still guilty. Yes. But it was not premeditated. Of course, they lied, and that’s wrong. So, I’m there with you on that, again, assuming they did have sex.

      Sex offender list? Wow! That’s really to the extreme and crazy. I think you should read up on what a sex offender is. It mitigates those who really have been hurt by sex offenders.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 2:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      @Paul Purcell: agreed. Let’s put it in perspective. It was alleged sex, not someone who got killed. I agree, that if they did it, and it’s against the laws, then they are wrong. And lying on top is not cool.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 2:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mc
      mc

      Technically the two men haven’t really denied or confirmed having sex on the balcony so I’m not sure if saying they lied is correct. In the first interview they said they weren’t going to say one way or the other & in another one one guy just said he wasn’t flashing children. On the Atlantis wall their statement in part was: They weren’t doing anything anyone else wasn’t doing including the CEO of Atlantis.

      People need a little perspective. As this one taxi driver witness stated:

      “The people it disturbed were the ones who stood looking at it. People stood there looking at it, if you don’t want to see it then don’t look”.
      He said he will not support calls for the government to prevent them from coming to the island as there are “many gay people right here in Dominica why should I have a problem with a gay boat?”
      “All I want is to make my money I don’t worry with those people. We know they are gay and we know that they are doing it, we know those things are happening in Dominica so I don’t see how this should be a problem”

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @scott ny’er: Scott I agree with alot you said. Just so you know I have been on 15 of these cruises most in staterooms like the one in the picture. I have stood on my balcony and watched people on the dock pick there nose so there is no way these two could ever convince someone who has been in this position they could not be seen. Have I ever had sex on one of those balconies? You bet, and it was great, but it was always at night and at sea. I have never seen anyone on an Atlantis cruise on the deck or balconies, in port, naked. String bikini, yes. Jock, yes.

      Like you, I have no problem having sex where I won’t be seen but I am not into public indecency. Whether these two were having sex or just hugging makes no difference. These two should not have been nude in public knowing there could be seen by, probably hundreds of people, in a non-clothing optional area.

      In my opinion this stunt was planned as either an attention getting or publicity opportunity. I wonder how much they plan on getting from guest appearances, the tabloids and/or a book? I don’t care if they are gay, straight, or people from Mars, this was completely out of line. At the very least I hope Atlantis refuses to allow them on any other cruises.

      One more thought…41 year old retired policeman? I never new policemen made that kind of money. Hmmmmm.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @mc: Good points MC. Reading the taxi driver’s comments makes me more willing to visit Dominica than St. Lucia. When our Atlantis cruise docked there the taxi drivers refused to pick up any passengers from the ship. I thought that was the proverbial ‘cutting off your nose to spite you face’ stance.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mc
      mc

      The retired policeman was the 53 year old. I’m not sure how you can tell the kind of money they make.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 394 · Looked In wrote, “BTW, don’t forget the other guy in Queerty’s picture – the guy one floor higher and a room to the left. If you adjust the contrast and do some filtering to “sharpen” the image, you can pick him out significantly better. Not true. I used photo software to try to do it, but it’s not possible.”

      Yes it is possible – I did it using Gimp – the ‘curves’ color tool to control the contrast and then a sharpen tool. It’s not like it let you see a penis, but it was enough to tell that more of the person was unclothed than you could tell from the Queerty image above as more of the flesh color was visible lower down.

      Just because “Looked In” can’t do it doesn’t mean that others can’t (and this was with a general-purpose program, not custom applications to enhance it as far as possible given that particular image).

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @scott ny’er

      1. The picture of a ship at sail linked at your comment #424 is absurd, given that the conduct occurred while the ship was moored at the dock. Moreover, Queerty’s pic isn’t what got them busted; it merely confirms what people had told authorities.

      2. Your comment #429 is entirely disingenuous, beginning with your opening “Whoa!” There are a bunch of people who were on the cruise who’ve posted here, and it’s perfectly acceptable that some of them would be ticked off by the sorts of absurdities you and others who weren’t there have posted.

      @mc

      They don’t need to “confirm or deny” having sex on the balcony. We have a picture.

      @Paul Purcell

      1. It wasn’t “alleged.” They were having sex. It’s a fact, and it’s why Queerty stuck the black bar on the cut-out.

      2. We have conflicting statements about whether people from that ship were comfortable on land. Every statement other than yours, which is second hand, say they were comfortable, and I believe them.

      3. They were wearing bathing suits? You need stronger reading glasses, my friend. And even Dennis Mayer told the L.A. television station that they were naked out there.

      @Dave [Different person #1 using similar name]

      I think “pedro” is a waste of time. Frankly, I’m not even convinced he’s actually a 20-something to begin with. He writes like someone older and embittered. Whatever he is, though, I don’t think anyone here is going to reach him.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @B

      Congrats, you used a specialized editing program to create an image you wanted to see. And from a 63kb image, no less. And for what? To show that some guy who wasn’t charged with anything might have been naked, in your imagination?

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Just so you know I have been on 15 of these cruises most in staterooms like the one in the picture. I have stood on my balcony and watched people on the dock pick there nose so there is no way these two could ever convince someone who has been in this position they could not be seen.

      That really ought to settle this, but of course so should multiple similar comments, and the picture. The fact that you still have people like “B” trying to invent outlandish alternatives shows that some people will never be swayed by something so inconvenient as facts.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 379 · “i was on the cruise” made a fool of himself by writing, “@B: That is not a picture of the ship in the Port of Roseau. The pier in Roseau IS NOT concrete. God, you’re a moron.”

      Before calling someone a “moron”, you might want to learn to think and do some fact checking first: that picture was the one that a Roseau-based newspaper showed in the article about the incident, and it did not claim to be a picture of the pier but of the ship. It was probably taken a bit to the side of the pier to get as clear a view of the ship as possible. What it does show is that the ship was a non-trivial distance from shore. Viewed from shore or near that end of the pier, those two guys would not stand out if the photo was not enlarged and cropped or taken with a telephoto lens.

      http://dominicanewsonline.com/news/all-news/general/update-gay-cruise-ship-docks-in-dominica-two-passengers-arrested-for-buggery-indecent-exposure/ has the article containing the picture, and entitled it “the ship in port”. If it was not taken in Dominica at the location in question, that newspaper misrepresented the picture. I might add that adjacent to that picture, there was a picture of some police officers or other people in uniform showing up for the arrest.

      I suspect your hostile reaction is an indication that you don’t like seeing the truth. There’s also no way of knowing if you were actually on that cruise – the user name you picked doesn’t necessarily reflect reality, and there are some people posting here trying to whitewash Dominica’s concept of law enforcement.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @B:

      Mr B. A Question if i may.
      I Dont know where you live but do people on cruise ships normally have “sex” on their balconies?
      and how can you not think they are having sex. The guy is grabbing the ‘wall thing’
      while the guy at his back has his hand on his hips so he can pull the guy in…
      for someone who is scrutinizing that picture with such a powerful lense that you see a guy in the room above NAKED. why cant u see them having sex. You found that guy’s in the room above “alleged” penis so use ur GIMP skills to find the penis of the other guy.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 4:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      made an error
      name is Barnacle Not B

      Apr 2, 2012 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • blessed
      blessed

      i am from this lovely island and we welcome every one to our shores. we do not discriminate but it was very stupid to be having sexon a balcony. The area where the ship dock is a public area and is used by all islanders including children. During the time that sexual activity was taking place, ther could have been school children on the bayfront looking at the ship.

      We love everyone to come to our island. It is the most lovely isalnd in the caribbean and we have alot to offer in terms of natural beauty but please respect the islanders. keep your sexual activity in the bedroom not on a balcony for our young children to view.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No. 346 · z ; No. 347 · Eric Auerbach ; No. 348 · z ; No. 352 · Eric Auerbach

      Interesting that all of you are so bent on ignoring details about the photo above, which is what is fueling various people’s reactions to these two guys. Now, the picture shows that they were on the balcony with their clothes off (anything else is speculation). However, the comments directed towards this couple are based on the assumption that
      people on the dock saw exactly what you see in that picture. There’s a lot of denial of obvious facts going on here. In reality, the picture was magnified and/or taken with a telephoto lens. From where it was taken, chances are that hardly anyone would have noticed these two guys. If someone was 4 stories up, naked on a balcony, and you were
      300 feet away, how likely would you be to notice that person? A screen on the side of the balcony obscures the face of one of the couple, even at that distance. As you walk towards the ship, that screen will obscure more and more of the couple, one of whom is touching the screen, and when very close to the ship, the floor of the balcony will block one’s view of them.

      While they were out on the balcony with their clothes off, it is possible that the closest person who could see them was a good 150 feet away and would not be able to pick out any objectionable anatomical features from that distance: the angular extent of a standard sized erect penis at 150 feet is 0.2 degrees – below 0.02 degrees, a high-contrast pattern of alternating black and white bars, with one pair covering 0.02 degrees, would appear gray, so at that distance, it would be difficult if not impossible to tell the difference between a naked person and someone with a nearly flesh-colored bikini without some magnification.

      Now, this may not be relevant to a charge of indecent exposure (naked in public view), but it is relevant to one’s opinion of whether these two guys were simply unobservant or whether they were exhibitionists. Depending on the details (which have not been provided), they might not have even realized that they would be spotted. It’s worth noting that those details are missing.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Katrina Swales
      Katrina Swales

      People complaining about it being a telephoto picture, seem to be forgetting one thing, why would they be using one on that section in the ship for no reason? If no one saw anything why do it?

      Apr 2, 2012 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • keith manheck(keithm)
      keith manheck(keithm)

      These clowns got what they deserved. Pure & simple. We don’t need to see your little sexcapades. I still think Atlantis is not blameless, either. Going to a known homophobic port. I mean come on! Then these 2 idiots shove the laws down the locals throat. They knew damn well not to do this, but they had to flaunt their shortcomings for all to see.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 5:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      You know. A few months back two gay guys in chicago were arrested and added to the sex offenders registry for engaging in public sex. Guess we should all boycott Chicago next.

      Fact is there are very few places on the planet where homophobia doesn’t exist. Atlantis events promotes all gay vacations. It does not promote all gay destinations. Atlantis works very closely with the destinations to ensure a safe and enjoyable experience for their clients. I have been on 9 Atlantis cruises and have enjoyed every single one. I had a fantastic time in Dominica and was greeted with smiles by the locals. BUT I treated them with respect as a guest in their country. As a gay man I refuse to miss out on life experiences simply because it’s not gay friendly. Being gay is what I am but it doesn’t define me. There is a whole world of life outside the gay community.

      Number one rule of travel is to respect the place you are visiting.

      The behavior exhibited by these to men was inappropriate and disrespectful. PERIOD. It has nothing to do with being prudish. We were warned on the ship about the “tension” on the island and these guys wanted to make a spectacle.

      As a passenger on the ship I was offended by the actions of these two men.
      1. Because we had a chance to change the way this island felt about gays and instead they added fuel to the prejudice
      2. Their actions could have endangered many of the law abiding passengers on the ship who were touring the island

      Public sex is illegal and inappropriate, Period. I know for a fact that Atlantis made every effort to ensure the safe return of these two individuals to us soil. But Atlantis is in NO WAY responsible for the actions of these two men.

      For those who criticize Atlantis for sailing to non gay friendly islands. If they avoided all destinations with homophobia, there would be no vacation.

      I love Atlantis and hope to travel with them for years to come. I also loved Dominica and also hope to someday return.

      It’s not about gay friendly or not. It’s not about being prudish its about traveling respectfully, something “MOST” Americans, gay or straight could use a lesson in.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 5:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      GOOD GAWD! Would you people get a life? I started reading this blog because I found it interesting but it has digressed to slamming other bloggers for their opinions.

      1 – If you have not been on two or more Atlantis cruised, shut the f*** up about Atlanis. You do NOT know what you are talking about. To the babbling idiot that stated Atlantis designates a “bugger deck” you DO NOT not what your are talking about or I have missed the memo on all 15 cruises. I hope Atlantis goes after you for slander/libel! Atlantis does have a “code of ethics” that essentially says do whatever you want BUT NOT IN PUBLIC! That code also states not to offend any locals in port.

      2 – Now, before all you gurls get your panties in more of a twist than they already are, I am NOT an Atlantis employee. I have enjoyed 15 cruises with them but I don’t always agree with the way they do things. The most recent was a video clip of Rich referring to this incident as nothing more than a ticket, thus comparing it to a traffic violation. WRONG! For that, I will have to seriously consider giving Atlantis or RSVP any more of my money.

      3 – I’ve seen alot of you discussing gay rights. What these two low-lifes did was not about gay rights. In every port, city, state, and country I have been this would have been considered indecent exposure, at best, whether they were gay, straight, or aliens.

      4 – Now to the idiots themselves. They lied! I don’t care why, they LIED to the public on world television. Mistreated? LMAO! If they had been led throughout Dominica nude with a leash around there genitals or hung naked in front of the courthouse then I would agree. So they spent a night in jail…would that not have happened in any city, anywhere in the world? A friend of mine spent the night in jail for proposition an undercover cop and there were clothed. Mistreated? I say treated better than they deserved.

      5 – I do not agree with Dominica’s laws BUT, at present, they are the laws. I noticed more than one Dominican stating they were slowing changing them. Good for them! What I will say is this incident has undoubtedly set them back a great many years. That being said, I don’t agree with alot of the laws in the US. I don’t want to ‘marry’ my partner of 15 years but I would certainly like to be able to be in a civil union with him. We have spent hundreds of dollars in legal fees to give us even a small portion of rights that a “married” couple have.

      6 – Alright, I am done ranting but I want ALL of you to consider something. Why did they do it? Either they are so stupid they barely know their own name OR they were seeking attenion and/or publicity. They lied on world television maybe, or not, knowing pictures were taken of them on that balcony. Do we hear tabloid and/or tv interviews paying money. A lucrative book deal? Trying to discredit Atlantis?

      I wonder how a 41 year old cop is able to retire and take cruises. They must make ALOT more money than I thought.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 5:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caribbee
      Caribbee

      Why do you call Dominica a homophobic port? Gay cruises have been coming here for many years without any incident. Then these reckless men undid all goodwill that the previous parties had gathered. Instead of blaming them for thier wanton exhibitionism you guys are blaming the real victim which is the Country and people of Dominica.

      The men were not even charged for the act of sodomy/buggery but on a much milder charge of indecent exposure. Had they done that in “gay friendly” California they would be in prison all now so they should be expressing gratitude for leniency instead of staing an incocent nation,s name by thhier vicious lies.

      Gays can’t force straight people to go gay or vice versa. What can be done is to tolerate one another as human beings. Trying to force your habits on none gays by silly acts like what these guys did will not help your cause at all.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 5:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • missedgle
      missedgle

      Queerty,
      Ok it’s time to shut it down,these’s two neanderthals have taken us back to 1969 STONEWALL.I’m so upset ova this,this is the main reason the GOP is always on us. This whole story is just lewd in so many ways,as of 4-2-2012 this is my last post about this HOTMESS.ORG

      Apr 2, 2012 at 6:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Caribbee
      Caribbee

      @Houston Bill:

      Could u prove this 35 counts of buggery? Please reference your allegations or shut up.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 6:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 440: “Mr B. A Question if i may. I Dont know where you live but do people on cruise ships normally have “sex” on their balconies? and how can you not think they are having sex.”

      The picture does not prove they were having sex on the balcony, just that they were on the balcony with their clothes off next to each other. It is plausible that they were not having sex on the balcony – they could have just had sex in their room and were standing on the balcony caressing afterwards. The refractory period comes to mind as one reason for not doing it again immediately (about 15 minutes for 18 year olds to around 20 hours for men in their 70s, as typical values). Keep in mind that this is a single picture. You need see some ‘back and forth’ motion to state that they were having sex at the time.

      Whether they were having sex or not, it is worth noting that people are jumping to conclusions.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 6:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @missedgle: TOTALLY AGREE. Kill this bitch-slapping forum!

      Apr 2, 2012 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 447 · 15 cruise alumni asked, “Why did they do it? Either they are so stupid they barely know their own name OR they were seeking attenion and/or publicity.”

      You missed a case – that they didn’t know that anyone could see below their waists. There is some sort of panel below the railing on their balcony. From the picture, you can’t tell exactly what it is – glass, a screen with lots of openings, or any of a number of options. Let’s use glass as an example. The intensity of reflected light depends on the angle of incidence, plus the polarization. The glass will appear less transparent when viewed at high angles of incidence (this angle is measured from a line perpendicular to the surface). The angle of incidence for these two guys looking at the glass is much higher than for people viewing them from where the picture was taken. So, they could have conceivable thought that they were not visible below the waist when in fact they were.

      Unfortunately, we don’t have pictures looking downwards from where they were standing. So, maybe they were exhibitionists, but maybe they were just too hapless guys who didn’t remember or never studied enough physics to have a clue – sure its a ‘dumb’ mistake, but not quite in the category of being a real idiot as just some distraction would have been enough to get them in trouble.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 7:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • devon in CA
      devon in CA

      Probably too much liquor and meth made these guys behave like this.
      I’d suggest rehab for both. Palm springs is a small town and everyone there is disgusted and embarrassed.
      These two should move to a new locale fast after drying out.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 7:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @B:

      Soooo its ok for two naked men to be naked in plain view of the public in the country you are from?

      Apr 2, 2012 at 7:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @B: B, either you didn’t read my post completely or you are just as stupid as they are…OR, better question is, are you one of the idiots? Not only is it obvious in the picture that the glass panel is clear but your post also indicates you have not seen, let alone been on any cruise ship built since 1985.

      Why don’t you just slink back under the rock you came from and leave the real world alone. You are just so LAME!

      Apr 2, 2012 at 7:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Caribee, I can only hope that the majority on Dominica will realize that these two individuals were not representative of those on that ship, or of the vast majority of the U.S. gay community. I’d hate to think that one act of stupidity would wipe out all goodwill.

      I realize that you, and others, are upset. You have every right to be. But please put it in perspective. There are very, very few defenders of those people, even here on this website, which tends to attract a subset of people who are more “outspoken” than most. But even here, the overwhelming consensus of opinion is saying that those two passengers were deeply embarrassing, not just to Dominica and to the U.S. gay community, but to themselves.

      I really think they will have a tough time even in their heavily gay home town of Palm Springs, California. They got exactly what they deserved in Dominica, and the very large majority of gay people who are aware of the incident think so.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 8:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 456 · 15 cruise alumni made a fool of himself by saying, “@B: B, either you didn’t read my post completely or you are just as stupid as they are…OR, better question is, are you one of the idiots? Not only is it obvious in the picture that the glass panel is clear …”

      Hey moron, take a piece of glass and try to see through it nearly edgewise. As the glass
      tilts, your ability to see through it changes because the amount of light that is reflected versus refracted changes with angle. What I was pointing out is that, depending on where they were standing relative to the glass, how well they could see through it would be different than how well someone on the ground at a distance could see through it.

      If they were mostly thinking about each other, and glanced quickly, they might have thought they weren’t or couldn’t be observed. It’s highly dependent on their positions. You’d want a photo from exactly where they were to say for sure.

      It may be dumb, but it is not the same as purposely flaunting it. They may not be nearly the idiots some of you are imagining. Instead, they may be just a bit clueless about physical laws.

      Apr 2, 2012 at 10:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Seaguy
      Seaguy

      They still did not deserve to be treated the way they were! Like they are the first to have sex on the balcony of their cabin on a gay cruise?

      Two men who love each other getting caught up in the moment while on a romantic vacation should not have been vilified like they were.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 454 · Barnacle wrote. “@B: Soooo its ok for two naked men to be naked in plain view of the public in the country you are from?” In the U.S., it is left to state law or local ordinances. There is no federal law banning it and no state law in California, which leaves the matter up to individual counties, cities, or towns. In San Francisco, they never got around to passing an ordinance banning public nudity, and a small fraction of the public takes advantage of that.

      Yesterday, I saw several naked people in San Francisco in the Castro district. There were also a couple of guys in their early 20s standing outside a bar in their underwear (briefs). They said they were there for a fund-raiser at the bar, to attract customers, and wished they were inside due to the temperatures. A few naked guys were at the corner of Market Street and Castro. The movie theater a couple of hundred feet away was showing a sing-along version of the Wizard of Oz, with a large crowd lined up to get in. Nearly everyone was fully clothed, typically with a jacket or sweater and long pants due to the temperature (about 15 deg. Celsius, with a wind).

      Now, you provincial types might be shocked by all this, but nobody was staring at the naked guys. If anything, the naked guys were being ignored by everyone else and all they really did was to stand around and talk to each other. The standard joke about it is, “why are the people you see with their clothes off never the people you’d really like to see with their clothes off.” It’s actually kind of fun: when San Francisco residents have out of town visitors and they see some of these naked guys, the residents can just act blase and say, “Well, this *is* San Francisco.” After all, its a city where craziness, while not required, is somewhat expected.

      So, you can go around naked in San Francisco if you want, but probably about 10 people out of roughly 800,000 actually do it on city streets (more do at the few nude beaches in the area).

      Apr 3, 2012 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew
      Andrew [Different person #1 using similar name]

      They are two attention seeking idiots. A straight couple would have landed up in jail as well.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 4:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ben
      ben

      @Johnny: This is sickening. Flagrantly fucking like animals with no regard for anyone except themselves. It’s shit like this that signaled the fall of the Roman empire.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 4:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      Because it is legal there, you can smoke pot in canada but can u do it washinton?

      Apr 3, 2012 at 6:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      Btw do you have a wife? i think you’re gay but do you have a wife? if you do i wanna meet her so we can be naked. And she can be bracing a wall joined at the hip with me. then we’ll send you the pics…and you’ll be like…”naaaa no sex, she wasnt cheating “:D

      Apr 3, 2012 at 6:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      Btw do you have a wife? i think you’re gay but do you have a wife? if you do i wanna meet her so we can be naked. And she can be bracing a wall joined at the hip with me. then we’ll send you the pics…and you’ll be like…”naaaa no sex, she wasnt cheating “:D

      Apr 3, 2012 at 6:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bigg
      Bigg

      @Barnacle – whether it’s legal where you are or not, those last few posts imply that YOU’VE been smoking some pot. If you don’t have something legitimate to say, why not say it somewhere else?

      Apr 3, 2012 at 7:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @Bigg:
      So are you of the opinion they were not having sex?
      Look at the picture…they are not two naked men standing there.
      NUMBER 1) the guy is braced and the guy has his hands on his hips and is posed to entering him.
      NUMBER 2) I SAW THEM, i SAW the motion depicting penetration

      Apr 3, 2012 at 8:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @Bigg:
      Just tell me that there was nothing wrong with what the men were doing or their state on the balcony on the ship that day in full view of the public.

      Just say” there was nothing wrong if i was walking around with my kids and i saw this infront me, my family and i would just stop to say hi and have a little chat”

      Please tell me this

      Apr 3, 2012 at 8:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mc
      mc

      It’s done & everyone survived. I dislike this whole business of shame and wanting a pound of flesh. Just a day or two ago in Dominica two British tourists were attacked and robbed. That’s doing actual harm. This is an incident. That attack does not represent how all Dominica people act & this does not represent all American Gay men. Stop with the hand wringing about what someone saw or might have seen. I hope this couple go on & lead productive lives learning a lesson and moving on.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 9:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @mc:

      you’re talking rubbish.
      First of all dont talk like you’re country has crime
      Secondly you mean if two tourist were attacked and robbed, the law shouldnt prosecute a rapist because two people were robbed, so since they not gonna prosecute a rapist because tourist were robbed so since we not prosecuting the rapist lets let the murderers go free.

      Wrong is wrong everyone has to pay for the crime when caught
      stop spewing garbage

      Apr 3, 2012 at 11:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mc
      mc

      There was no rape so your comparisons are rubbish. Keep things in proportion to what happened & stop overreacting. No actual harm came to anyone over this & It’s over.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 11:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      Has anyone seen any follow up press with these guys since the photo has gone viral? They didn’t waste anytime showing up on the local Palm Springs TV news playing the gay card and claiming that they were only naked on the balcony. I’m guessing they have not said a word in the media since the pic proves otherwise.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @mc:

      no but you are saying…Two people were robbed in dominica so they should forget about the two men having sex in the town because there was a robbery…utter…garbage

      Apr 3, 2012 at 12:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @mc:

      you are yet to answer my other question btw

      here it is again
      Just tell me that there was nothing wrong with what the men were doing or their state on the balcony on the ship that day in full view of the public.

      Just say” there was nothing wrong if i was walking around with my kids and i saw this infront me, my family and i would just stop to say hi and have a little chat”

      Please tell me this

      Apr 3, 2012 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mc
      mc

      @Barnacle: No, I’m saying the robbery did tangible harm while this did not as it merely required averting your eyes & walking away. It’s not like the two men weren’t punished. They were arrested & they were fined & now they have a picture that’s on the internet that anyone can see including, family, friends & grandchildren. This may affect their employment now & in the future. Plus they have the added benefit of people commenting how horrible a person they must be. That’s enough as far as I’m concerned. I don’t have the need to beat a dead horse, get a pound of flesh out of them. I’m not defending them, just keep your anger over this incident in proportion to what happened. I don’t care to argue over this either, so have a nice day.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 12:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      well it was their fault to lie and say they were not having sex.
      if they did that in califonia they would be on a sex offender list which sounds worst to me.
      they got off easy if you ask me.

      and dont you see the guy looking at the camera?

      Apr 3, 2012 at 12:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      They still did not deserve to be treated the way they were! Like they are the first to have sex on the balcony of their cabin on a gay cruise?

      Dockside, in view of hundreds of people, in a foreign country. Somehow, I doubt it’s common behavior.

      Yesterday, I saw several naked people in San Francisco in the Castro district. There were also a couple of guys in their early 20s standing outside a bar in their underwear (briefs). They said they were there for a fund-raiser at the bar, to attract customers, and wished they were inside due to the temperatures. A few naked guys were at the corner of Market Street and Castro. The movie theater a couple of hundred feet away was showing a sing-along version of the Wizard of Oz, with a large crowd lined up to get in. Nearly everyone was fully clothed, typically with a jacket or sweater and long pants due to the temperature (about 15 deg. Celsius, with a wind).

      NEWS FLASH! Dominica isn’t the Castro. Pass it along.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MBenjamin
      MBenjamin

      It is clearly they are to be blamed for there actions in region where in particular homosexuality is a “NO NO”. You are asking for trouble and you just may get it, like they did. Alcohol drugs whatever, does not matter, you are responsible for your own actions. They were not on ship in the Meditoranian like Mykonos where you may not have such a problem or even ot at sea, where there is no public docks. If you are able to view the docks from the balconies, then whomever is on the docks can view you in the balconies plain and simple. Nothing wrong with “HOT HARD HORNEY SEX”, take it from one who knows. All we can hope for is that they and others have learned from this incident. We are adults right, well some of us.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @mc: “Technically the two men haven’t really denied or confirmed having sex on the balcony so I’m not sure if saying they lied is correct.

      Right, and when someone shoots another person, technically its the bullet that kills them, not the shooter.

      Give me a break. The guys dick was in his bf’s ass, he knows it, the bf knows it, and what do they do when they come back, run to the local TV station, and use the gay card and claim they were only naked to distract from what they both knew was the truth. They should be ashamed of themselves.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 476 · Looked In wrote (regarding a description of nudity in the Castro), “NEWS FLASH! Dominica isn’t the Castro. Pass it along.”

      Dude, the moron I was replying to asked if nudity was legal in the country I live in. I provided an answer – yes in some places, giving an example in the Castro. The moron did not ask about whether nudity was legal in Dominica. You really need to work on your reading comprehension – I had quoted the moron’s question.

      Later this same moron claimed to have seen the couple in question with some activity indicating sex. The problem is that, given various other things he said, I’d give him less credibility than I’d give to Rush Limbaugh if you could have a credibility of less than zero.

      The moron also guessed I was gay and then asked if I had a wife, making sexual comments about said alleged wife, posting such questions on a gay web site. Do you think he might be homophobic and that homophobia just might influence his perceptions of what he remembered seeing, assuming he didn’t just make it all up? And if he was a local, why would he bother looking at a cruise ship? They show up there regularly so the mere presence of one is not newsworthy any more than seeing a city bus go by would be.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:

      B wrote…And if he was a local, why would he bother looking at a cruise ship?

      Seriously are are you trying to fault me for seeing the gay men?
      While we on the point that i shouldnt be looking at a ship cause i see it every day, just cross the highway…cause you see it everyday

      Secondly not because something is legal in your country means it is legal in mine

      Thridly if you see ur boyfriend in a similar picture with another guy (lol) please do not complain? because they arent having sex

      Apr 3, 2012 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      you also said nudity is allowed in SOME places in your country. so what happens when two men are naked and joined at the hip in a place where nudity is NOT allowed

      Apr 3, 2012 at 2:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Dude, the moron I was replying to asked if nudity was legal in the country I live in. I provided an answer – yes in some places, giving an example in the Castro.

      I guess I need to repeat this, because you’re obviously having a hard time reading things today.

      NEWS FLASH! Dominica isn’t the Castro. Pass it on.

      Later this same moron claimed to have seen the couple in question with some activity indicating sex. The problem is that, given various other things he said, I’d give him less credibility than I’d give to Rush Limbaugh if you could have a credibility of less than zero.

      Multiple witnesses, and a photograph, show two fellas having sex. And we have a posting from a 15-time Atlantis cruiser who is familiar with their ships and says there’s no way the couple couldn’t have been seen. Yet, “B” keeps it up with his denial. If he’s looking for a “moron,” I suggest that “B” stroll to the nearest mirror and take a good, long look.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 2:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • arbiter
      arbiter

      Sooooooo busted. Ah well, they took a chance, thought they wouldn’t get caught somehow (that’s practically dock level!) and were pissed they got a severely embarrassing and public reprimand, fine and now some negative publicity, not only for them, but for the gay community. So, yeah, very dumb. My guess is, because they are tourists, they got off light for a country that doesn’t accept homosexuality. And they were probably mad and lashing out “you can’t treat us like this!” kind of B.S., and thinking they are a minority, went to the press with a bogus (vague) claim that they might’ve been ‘inappropriate’ but not al-out f**king in plain sight. Sigh. I guess that’s why you can’t trust criminals… aren’t jails filled with people claiming innocence? They got one thing right: they will have a crazy story to tell, albeit they may not want to tell it! And why, why does there always have to be some critique of their bodies included?? They look fine, decent shape, tan, one’s older, obviously… probably had a blast. lol

      Apr 3, 2012 at 5:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 480 · Barnacle wrote, “@B: B wrote…And if he was a local, why would he bother looking at a cruise ship? Seriously are are you trying to fault me for seeing the gay men?
      While we on the point that i shouldnt be looking at a ship cause i see it every day, just cross the highway…cause you see it everyday”

      Let’s just say I have doubts about your credibility. If you are looking at it “cross [sic] the highway”, then judging from the Google satellite view, that dock is tee
      shaped, and the ship would have been about 300 feet away from you. It’s not like some guys on a balcony are going to be obvious at that distance. Furthermore, most people are going to have no interest if a ship docks there regularly, treating it as just visual clutter of the sort most people filter out. (If you don’t know about this, read http://www.torontosun.com/life/healthandfitness/2011/04/14/17992956.html and http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110419163211.htm for some background material).

      So why were you looking at it so intently? That’s simply not normal behavior. Your stories are simply not credible – nobody who regularly reads this site is going to believe a word you say.

      I might also add that I’m now ignoring your questions. I answered one accurately so you replied with some inappropriate remarks and it seems that any question that gets answered will just be followed by another – like a 3 year old continually asking “Why?”

      Apr 3, 2012 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      OMG DUDE THEY ARE!!!

      have you never seen people waving to people on the docks?
      its painfully clear and obvious today i stayed about three lanes Inside the town and i could still see what people were wearing.

      im convinced you dont see as normal people should.

      ALSO please note you are again faulting me for seeing what i saw and not them for doing what they did.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      it seems that any question that gets answered will just be followed by another – like a 3 year old continually asking “Why?”

      Yup, “B” that sure does seem to be what you’re doing. Are you one of the overgrown boys who was arrested that day?

      Apr 3, 2012 at 7:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 482 · Looked In dissembled by replying to “Dude, the moron I was replying to asked if nudity was legal in the country I live in. I provided an answer – yes in some places, giving an example in the Castro” by saying “I guess I need to repeat this, because you’re obviously having a hard time reading things today. NEWS FLASH! Dominica isn’t the Castro. Pass it on.”

      Looked In is pretending that an answer to a question about “the country I live in” should be a statement about Dominica. It shouldn’t. If Looked In does not like the question, he should complain about the person who asked it, not the person who answered it.

      Then Looked In lied outright by saying, “Multiple witnesses, and a photograph, show two fellas having sex. And we have a posting from a 15-time Atlantis cruiser who is familiar with their ships and says there’s no way the couple couldn’t have been seen. Yet, “B” keeps it up with his denial.”

      First, the “multiple witnesses” are of unknown reliability. The photograph merely shows two people standing next to each other, with one hugging the other. Whether they were having sex cannot be determined from a single image. If they had just had sex in their room, the refractory period would prevent an sexual intercourse on the balcony.

      Second, Linked In is lying about what I stated, which was that, the vertical glass panel below the railing might have seemed far less transparent to them than to someone at a distance looking at them because the reflectivity of glass varies with the angle of incidence. You can see some graphs illustrating this effect at http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/freseq.html . As I said, it depends on their exact position on the balcony. If they were really into each other, while walking towards the balcony, they probably saw the shore some distance off (about 300 feet) with no one in sight (as they wouldn’t see the dock. Once on the balcony, their view looking down could be misleading as the glass would appear less transparent to them. Given that they were no doubt mostly paying attention to each other, it’s plausible that they really didn’t know that they would be seen below their waists. So, I wouldn’t assume they were exhibitionists as it is plausible that they were merely unobservant.

      What “Linked In” calls “denial” is merely an understanding of the laws of physics – before judging the behavior these two, I’d want to see some pictures showing what they would see walking towards the balcony and looking down once on it from where they were standing (to see how transparent the glass panel would appear to them). That sort of data is quite relevant – it would help distinguish a somewhat understandable mistake from willful, egregious behavior.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 8:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      Then Looked In lied outright by saying, “Multiple witnesses, and a photograph, show two fellas having sex. And we have a posting from a 15-time Atlantis cruiser who is familiar with their ships and says there’s no way the couple couldn’t have been seen. Yet, “B” keeps it up with his denial.”

      First, the “multiple witnesses” are of unknown reliability. The photograph merely shows two people standing next to each other, with one hugging the other. Whether they were having sex cannot be determined from a single image. If they had just had sex in their room, the refractory period would prevent an sexual intercourse on the balcony.
      ————————————————————————————–

      Above is a post from B. Looked IN did not lie when he said multiple witness, and a photograph of two men having sex. but since you know better than the 100 people working the port that day i would have you know there were police officer and port security that saw. according to a passanger on that boat. im sure you read the article

      Apr 3, 2012 at 9:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      if it would of bin a man & a woman it would of never got this far………..so what they had sex on their vacation………like any of you would not do the same

      Apr 3, 2012 at 9:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @mike:

      no one said they couldnt have sex on their vacation, if they were arresting them for having sex on their vacation they would arrest all the passangers

      Apr 3, 2012 at 10:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 488 · Barnacle also lied by stating, “Looked IN did not lie when he said multiple witness, and a photograph of two men having sex.” The photograph does not provide proof that these two guys were having sex as it is consistent with them hugging after having sex in their room. It’s a still photograph, so you can’t see any back-and-forth motion in it.

      As to the witnesses, given the level of homophobia in that part of the word, I would not consider them credible, and that is what I stated. Preconceptions influence what people remember seeing, and it is very easy to turn a hug from behind into sex. Also, the average refractory period is about 30 minutes, so it is believable that they might not be having sex even if they would have liked to, depending on what went on in their cabin before they wandered out onto the balcony.

      I might add that given your other comments, I’m not going to accept anything you try to pass off as factual without independent proof, none of which has been provided. All we have is a single picture, and that is ambiguous.

      Apr 3, 2012 at 10:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      ok so
      The captain of the boat is lying, the people on the boat who reported them are lying, the police officers are lying , Me an EYE WITNESS that was there is lying as well. and the only person that is telling the truth is the two guys and you lets not forget you weren’t there?

      Very rarely do people turn in themselves for murder sir

      Apr 3, 2012 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 492 · Barnacle wrote, “@B:ok so The captain of the boat is lying, the people on the boat who reported them are lying, the police officers are lying , Me an EYE WITNESS that was there is lying as well.”

      The captain of the boat reported that they were arrested. He wasn’t a witness. Nobody saw them while still on the boat. One person who had been on the ship and who was 150 to 225 feet away at first thought they were engaging in oral sex but then, when someone else suggested anal sex, went with that. That tells you he couldn’t even tell reliably which way the two were facing. He’s simply not credible – his own statements indicate that his perceptions were being influenced by what he was told. The other people who supposedly observed this were reported to be at roughly the same distance – a nearby woman grabbed a policeman, who hadn’t noticed either. At a similar distance, the policeman might also have been influenced by what she told him.

      At that distance, I don’t consider those reports particularly reliable. They seemed to be on the balcony with their clothes off. Whether they were having sex or simply caressing after having sex inside their room is a guess. I’d consider your claims even less reliable given the other things you posted here – as far as I’m concerned, your credibility is zero. If you don’t like that, then maybe you shouldn’t have posted your trash talk about your wanting to be naked with another person’s alleged wife. I might add that in No 485, you said, “i stayed about three lanes Inside the town”, which puts you over 300 feet away from them. You were too far away to reliably say if they were having sex or not, yet you insist that you saw them having sex, as opposed to (say) hugging.

      In addition, there is a long history of gays being arrested on trumped up charges worldwide, with that changing as the gay-rights movement made progress, faster in some countries than others. Dominica, which still has a sodomy law, is obviously lagging behind. In the U.S. problems still crop up. Here’s just one recent example: http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/civilrights/20090202/3/2813 and this example is from a relatively liberal city. Also look at http://www.southfloridagaynews.com/news/local-news/5476-sfgn-publisher-launches-citizens-against-false-arrests.html and http://kentvent.blogspot.com/2009/08/gay-couple-wins-false-arrest-suit.html . With that sort of stuff still going on the U.S., why on earth would you expect us to take claims coming out of some tiny little country seriously when that tiny little country still has archaic anti-gay laws in place?

      Apr 4, 2012 at 1:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      You have a problem with seeing what is there and what is not there…no wonder you cant see they were having sex. read what i said in 485 again
      ———————————
      OMG DUDE THEY ARE!!!

      have you never seen people waving to people on the docks?
      its painfully clear and obvious today i stayed about three lanes Inside the town and i could still see what people were wearing.
      ——————————–

      What i said is i stayed three lanes inside the town today( which was yesterday) and i could see what people were wearing on the boat. MUCHLESS for when i was on the port.

      and FYI they did have oral sex and then they switched positions but hey…why would you believe me i was on the dock that day and you wasnt…there is no reason for you to believe me

      Apr 4, 2012 at 8:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mj.
      mj.

      @Franco: Because it’s indecent exposure, sodomy is indeed illegal on Dominica. It may not be right, but it’s true. And it’s in broad daylight. The ships docks in Roseau. That’s our capital. And for a country who relies heavily on tourism, a cruise ship is always a big deal. So it’s probably safe to say there was a large crowd and there were kids in that crowd. Would you like your kids to see ANYONE having sex?

      And speaking as a Dominican, and a heterosexual one at that, NEVER was I taught homophobia from my country. I don’t have Gay friends, or Straight friends, or Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, Indian friends. I have and have always had human friends. There are so many of you treating this situation like a slight hiccup, a breeze in the wind. It isn’t. This was wildly inappropriate. As I said before, there were a lot of people and worse, children at that port. I’m currently in America going to school. I can’t even pee outside without getting arrested for indecent exposure. So why do people think that it’s okay to go to a foreign country and do these things? And this isn’t a gay thing. Unfortunately, it’s a tourist thing. So many tourists think that because they’re on vacation they can completely disregard the natives and their laws. That they are not bound by our rules because they aren’t from there. All this kind of behavior does is leave a sour taste in the mouths of the natives and a bad reflection on the tourists and where they come from. I don’t speak for every Dominican, just myself. This saddens me. I’m saddened at the way they were treated, I’m saddened that they felt the need to act so inappropriately, I’m saddened that they felt the need to lie, but most of all, I’m saddened that there are still those who feel that it was “right” that they would behave so badly and that my beautiful country should be condemned because of their actions.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 11:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mj.
      mj.

      @B: Marinate on this. When I was younger, my teacher took us to the docks once on a field trip. MY WHOLE CLASS. We couldn’t have been older than eight. Whether they were having sex, or just naked on their balcony, imagine your child, niece, nephew, etc. is on that dock and they look up and they see two naked people, or worse, two people having sex. Is that still okay? Are they still just having fun on their vacation? Does it still matter if they’re having sex? Let’s put this in context. Two Dominicans, (Race and sexual orientation are irrelevant. They’re just two people from Dominica), go to America on vacation. They are seen naked, on their balcony, in full view of the public. This isn’t a beach or a retreat or anything like that. This is in your capital. Is it still okay?

      Apr 4, 2012 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @mj, take comfort in the realization that “B” is very, very much in the minority. Gay reaction to what those fellas did has been very heavily negative. I can only hope that people in Dominica will realize that.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 3:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 494 · Barnacle idiotically wrote, “@B: You have a problem with seeing what is there and what is not there …” Nope. I’m just giving you zero credibility. You are trying to claim two guys on a balcony were actually having sex when you were viewing them from about 300 feet away. From that distance, you can’t distinguish sex acts from mere hugging.

      Read http://www.queerty.com/exclusive-very-very-obvious-that-atlantis-cruise-duo-in-dominica-were-having-sex-says-witness-20120327/ which includes a report that they were supposedly having sex. The statements were provided by someone named Juan Claudio, who said, “The ruckus at the dock became more excited when it appeared, at first to me, that they were engaging in oral sex. The two guys in front of me then said, ‘No, they are fucking!’ As I leaned forward in my seat, I noticed that they were fucking, and in a standing position. It was very, very obvious that they were engaged in fucking. We were not that far away from the ship, maybe one half to three quarters the length of a football field. Again, did they know we could see them?”

      The problem with this report is that Claudio’s opinion of what he saw changed as he heard comments from others. It’s quite possible that someone though the couple were having anal sex and that influenced the perceptions of people who heard it – that sort of thing has happened before. It isn’t surprising – Claudio was 150 to 225 feet away from the boat according to his account.

      Meanwhile, “Barnacle” claimed to have seen the incident from over 300 feet away. At 300 feet, their pelvic area would have an angular extent of 0.2 degrees. It’s small enough that you could easily misinterpret what you were looking at.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 5:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 496 · mj. wrote, “@B: Marinate on this. When I was younger, my teacher took us to the docks once on a field trip. MY WHOLE CLASS. We couldn’t have been older than eight. Whether they were having sex, or just naked on their balcony, imagine your child, niece, nephew, etc. is on that dock and they look up and they see two naked people, or worse, two people having sex. Is that still okay?”

      What it “is” is irrelevant to the discussion! What was being discussed is the reliability of evidence as to whether these two were actually having sex and whether they realized that they could be seen while on their balcony with their clothes off. The evidence is simply weaker than some people imagine for a number of reasons outlined above.

      Then we have that fool Linked In saying, “No. 497 · Looked In saying, ‘@mj, take comfort in the realization that “B” is very, very much in the minority. Gay reaction to what those fellas did has been very heavily negative. I can only hope that people in Dominica will realize that.”

      Rather, people were reacting to an assumption that these guys were in fact having sex on a balcony. The question I was raising was whether the evidence proved that this assumption was in fact true. What people in Dominica need to realize is that some of us are very concerned about weak evidence being used to falsely convict someone. There’s an on-going discussion about that in the U.S. right now due to the very high incarceration rate and the number of false convictions for racial minorities, Blacks in particular. Biases in how evidence is interpreted seems to be part of the problem. What we learn regarding how to fix this problem will be applicable world-wide – poor treatment of minorities seems to be a human problem that transcends borders and it is something that has to be prevented.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 5:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bottom
      Bottom

      The former officer was only doing a pat down with his night stick – assume the position – a cavity check to ensure no illegal contraband, very responsible

      Apr 4, 2012 at 8:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 495 · mj. wrote, “I’m saddened that there are still those who feel that it was “right” that they would behave so badly and that my beautiful country should be condemned because of their actions.”

      What your country is being criticized for is for still having sodomy laws, which the U.N. Human Rights Council has stated should be repealed. Plus the way they were arrested was an overreaction. If it was only being naked while visible to the public, a traffic-ticket type of citation would have sufficed. They could post bail and simply leave on the ship if they decided not to contest it. Nobody would have criticized Dominica for doing that, and a $50 ($100?) would have been enough to discourage people from going out on a balcony naked while in port if they were really so inclined.

      It is simply not clear if these guys were in fact having sex – witnesses were simply too far away to say definitively: from 150 to 300 feet or more away, you can’t pick out definitive signs such as an erection. Were they having sex, were they just hugging, or did they have some music playing in their cabin and were dancing to it? I’ve seen people dance (fully clothed, or at least with pants on) while holding each other in the position shown in Queerty’s image above. Were they just dancing? Possibly, but the picture does not include a soundtrack of what one would have heard on that balcony so we can’t really tell. And that’s the point – there are multiple more innocent explanations that fit the picture and you have to rule those out before concluding that they really were having sex.

      And that is the real point – while it is one thing to make jokes about them over a few drinks in a bar, it is another to throw them in jail for years – for that, the standards of proof should be much higher. You can’t just say, “I think they were having sex and the picture is consistent with that.” To be responsible, you’d have to do your best to come up with all the plausible hypotheses for what was going on and show that the evidence rules out all but one. If you don’t do that, you risk convicting innocent people. Is that what you want? Here’s an example of the sort of tragedy that can result: http://angola3news.blogspot.com/2012/03/outer-limits-of-solitary-confinement.html (a bit down in the article, there is a story about someone named Robert Hillary King who was wrongfully convicted of murder based on marginal and possibly fabricated evidence and who then spent 24 years in solitary confinement before the mistake was uncovered.)

      Does that have anything in common with the two guys recently arrested in your country? Well, it does – in both cases, people are looking for evidence that confirms their preconceptions, not for evidence that has the ability to disprove their preconceptions. You and a couple of others in particular are doing that. And that is precisely the sort of behavior that results in innocent people spending years in prison.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 10:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      The question I was raising was whether the evidence proved that this assumption was in fact true. What people in Dominica need to realize is that some of us are very concerned about weak evidence being used to falsely convict someone.

      As you know, but will not admit because the facts are too difficult for you, numerous eyewitnesses complained about the public sex act, and the two fellas involved pleaded guilty to indecent exposure, “humbly apologized” to the court and the people of Dominica, paid their fines, and left.

      Only when they returned to the United States did they find the courage to spin a lie about happened there. The photo in question here was never used as evidence in court; the complaints were. The picture was made public only after Dennis Mayer and John Hart returned to the United States and lied.

      “B” knows all of this, but continues to spout his inane denials. Like too many people, he just cannot possibly bear the thought that he just might be wrong. Poor “B!” So weak. So fragile. So foolish.

      Apr 4, 2012 at 10:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B: ‘
      At this point im convinced if you get a video you’re gonna say the strokes arent long enuff to be penetration.

      this is not hugging sir, this is not how people hug. he was going back an forth in him…not just standing there

      Apr 4, 2012 at 10:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kasnar
      Kasnar

      @Johnny: Yeah…I think we were all visualizing….or hoping…;-)

      Apr 5, 2012 at 12:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 502 · Looked In made a fool of himself by saying, “As you know, but will not admit because the facts are too difficult for you, numerous eyewitnesses complained about the public sex act, and the two fellas involved pleaded guilty to indecent exposure, “humbly apologized” to the court and the people of Dominica, paid their fines, and left.”

      Oh please. They “humbly apologized” because they were told they would otherwise be thrown in the hoosegow and nobody would be able to find the key. As to “numerous eyewitnesses”, why should we believe everything they said? We have one alleged witness posting comments here. His stated location was a good 300 feet from the boat. At that distance, the width of an erect penis (roughly 1 inch) would have an angular extent of 0.16 degrees, whereas the angular resolution of the human eye is around 0.02 to 0.03 degrees. Yet this character claims he saw them having sex when he was too far away to make out a penis, let alone determine if it was erect or not. Credible? Hardly.

      Witnesses may have noticed that they were naked, but so far nobody has produced compelling evidence of sexual activity.

      As to No 503, that fool calling himself Barnacle now says, “At this point im convinced if you get a video you’re gonna say the strokes arent long enuff to be penetration.
      this is not hugging sir, this is not how people hug. he was going back an forth in him…not just standing there” But, he was viewing these guys from a distance of about 300 feet. He has no way of telling if there was any penetration. He’s guessing based on his prejudices.

      This difference between my statements and theirs should be obvious. I’m being quantitative about it – making an assessment based on the known visual acuity of the human eye, the physical properties of glass and how it reflects and refracts light, etc. As Lord Kelvin said, “When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind,” a concept these self-proclaimed residents of Dominica quite obviously have never learned.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 3:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Correction – in No 505, 0.16 degrees should have been 0.016 degrees – somehow a ‘0’ after the decimal point didn’t get typed.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 3:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      I’m being quantitative about it – making an assessment based on the known visual acuity of the human eye, the physical properties of glass and how it reflects and refracts light, etc.

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!

      Apr 5, 2012 at 6:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @Looked In:
      lol i know right…

      Apr 5, 2012 at 8:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:

      This difference between my statements and theirs should be obvious. I’m being quantitative about it – making an assessment based on the known visual acuity of the human eye, the physical properties of glass and how it reflects and refracts light, etc. As Lord Kelvin said, “When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind,” a concept these self-proclaimed residents of Dominica quite obviously have never learned

      You’re being “quantitative” not factual, i dont care how light bends through glass or how fast sound travels or how far mars is from pluto but…what the hell does that have to do with two men having public sex.
      So help me understand this, according to Lord Kelvin and you need to measure what you are speaking about? so if i see some random guy shoot another, i need to be able to measure the distance else i cant say what i see in court?cause i have no knowledge of it? horse shit

      Apr 5, 2012 at 8:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Everjay
      Everjay

      Ah… I see some tacky Americans have gone abroad again. Ignorant and arrogant, stunned yet unbelievably LOUD. Clearly audible and identifiable in their carriage and deportment from further than 250 paces… as usual. Too dull to study Discretion 101 or to pay the slightest heed to local customs, secure in their whiny, insular belief that they are the exception to every rule, setting back not only burgeoning gay rights efforts within Dominica, but also making things more difficult for non-American LGBTQ tourists to Dominica from Europe, the UK, AUS/NZ, Canada, Japan and elsewhere. Well thanks a lot guys. Plus ça change…

      -Signed, a gay Canadian who, along with his partner, has visited Dominica (and many other officially “gay-unfriendly” nations) many times and has never received anything less than a warm welcome and hospitable treatment from locals, and who has yet to be confused with an American… and who is generally really sick of putting up with your $hit.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 12:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lord Kelvin's Ghost
      Lord Kelvin's Ghost

      I have been informed that a certain Mr. B has been throwing my name around to imply that I support his vain attempt to refute the irrefutable. Before I return to haunt him for the rest of his days, I would like Mr. B to understand that, as the inventor of Absolute Zero, I can be one cold motherfucker to people who try to make a fool out of me.

      Now cease and desist, Mr. B, or else.

      Cordially,

      The Ghost of Lord Kelvin

      Apr 5, 2012 at 12:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 509 · Barnacle wrot,e “You’re being “quantitative” not factual, i dont care how light bends through glass or how fast sound travels or how far mars is from pluto but…what the hell does that have to do with two men having public sex.”

      Actually, I am being both quantitative and factual. The question is simply the level of certainty we can have that these two were actually having sex in public as opposed to being out there naked doing something else. You were too far away to tell if they were having sex: at 300 feet, you simply can’t see them clearly enough without some magnification to say. Unlike you, I provided quantitative information to back up what I said – at 300 feet, a penis’ width has an angular extent of no more than 0.016 degrees and the human eye cannot pick out features whose angular extent is below 0.02 to 0.03 degrees. You simply could not tell if they were having sex from your location without binoculars, a telescope, etc.

      How light reflects off of glass is relevant because it is possible that these two guys didn’t realize that they were visible below the waist to people on the dock. That’s a
      consideration important for forming an opinion of the couple – we’d think less of them if they purposely went out on the balcony to scandalize the locals than if they didn’t realize that they would be seen, particular if they were fooled by some misleading visual cues.

      Both you and that ‘Looked In’ moron are assuming a priori that they had sex in public. I’m neutral on it and am simply noting the lack of convincing evidence. You claim they were, they claim they weren’t, and the evidence is ambiguous. The only hard evidence we have seen is a single photo, taken from an unknown location, but probably 150 to 300 feet away, and probably with a fair bit of magnification (telephoto lens and/or enlargement + cropping). It should be common knowledge that preconceptions can influence what you think you are seeing. We even have one case where a “witness” said that he first thought they were having oral sex and then thought they were having anal sex after another person suggested that it was anal sex. It wasn’t one followed by the other – it was a change in what he thought he was viewing triggered by a comment from someone else. That tells you something – he was too far away to say for sure, and could just as likely been wrong about whether he was seeing some guys having sex as opposed to doing something else. The same thing is true of your other “witnesses”, particularly given that nobody has stated precisely where those alleged witnesses were.

      Also, you claimed to be 300 feet away, across the road or something. You wouldn’t have personally interviewed any of these alleged witnesses, so what you are reporting is really hearsay from the “rumor mill”, about as unreliable a source of information as you can get. Let the rumor mill run for a while, and that scene could turn into a full scale orgy being filmed for a porn company. I’m not buying it without some real proof and you haven’t provided any.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 2:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      1st off, my penis is clearly visible at 300 ft *wink wink*

      Second of all that dude looked right at the camera, so he had to know he was visible.
      then dont give me that mess about light blends thru glass.

      you dont Stand infront of glass and dont think you are visible to everyone infront you.

      You say you want evidence? i am evidence that they were having sex, i was present so were police officers my statement would be valid in a court of law

      Apr 5, 2012 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @Barnacle: Barnacle, why bother responding to “B”? It has become very evident to many he is only on this blog to cause trouble. I suggest you save any more stress on your fingertips and ignore those people that are trying to justify the unjustifiable. Those type of people will never give up their campaign but that doesn’t mean they are correct. It just means they get off on antagonizing people who have common sense.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 6:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @Barnacle: @B: LMAO! OK, B. It’s time you moved on to another blog to antognize people who have intellegence about the cause they support. It is very obvious to most on this blog you are just here to cause trouble. It’s unfortuate you don’t have a life other than being disruptive on blogs. I hope you really figure out how to get a life.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 6:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 513 · Barnacle wrote, “@B: 1st off, my penis is clearly visible at 300 ft *wink wink*”

      Is that your way of admitting that you couldn’t see his?

      Then you say, “Second of all that dude looked right at the camera, so he had to know he as visible. then dont give me that mess about light blends thru glass.”

      He wasn’t looking right at the camera, which he probably never noticed since the camera was at least 150 feet away with the sun behind it. If anything he seemed to be looking at
      his boyfriend’s shoulder. Also, you can’t read – I was pointing out how light reflects off of glass and that how much is reflected varies with angle.

      Third, you say, “you dont Stand infront of glass and dont think you are visible to everyone infront you.”

      What he was thinking about was no doubt his boyfriend. If the glass did not look transparent where he was standing due to reflections and his viewing angle, it would be understandable if he forgot that he was next to something that is transparent when viewed at an angle of incidence of nearly 0. When walking out onto the balcony, he would have been looking approximately towards the sun (perhaps 45 degrees to the side, which is consistent with both the satellite photo of the dock and the picture above). It’s plausible that neither of them knew they would be seen by a number of people.

      Then you really make a fool of yourself by saying, “You say you want evidence? i am evidence that they were having sex, i was present so were police officers my statement would be valid in a court of law.”

      Actually, a lawyer would make mincemeat of you in a court of law. You’d have to claim you could see everything very clearly from a distance of 300 feet. They’d ask if you could see the guy’s penis and if you said you could, they could try a vision test using appropriately sized dildos – just set several on a table a few hundred feet away and then ask you how many were there.

      Re No. 514 and No 115 · “15 cruise alumni” – its apparent that you don’t want to see any facts. It wouldn’t surprise me if your user name is intended to be misleading as well – there are several alleged residents of Dominica with an ax to grind who don’t like it pointed out that the evidence that a certain couple were having sex on a balcony is rather weak – i.e., inconclusive.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 8:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      I trust that anyone from Dominica who happens to look this far into the thread will realize that “B” is stark, raving nuts, and highly unrepresentative of the U.S. gay community.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 9:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @Looked In: So Looked In….SO TRUE! Too bad there isn’t a way to block these “stark raving nuts” like “B” and let the rest of the world know they are highly unrepresentative of the U.S. gay community

      Apr 5, 2012 at 9:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:


      He wasn’t looking right at the camera, which he probably never noticed since the camera was at least 150 feet away with the sun behind it. If anything he seemed to be looking at
      his boyfriend’s shoulder. Also, you can’t read – I was pointing out how light reflects off of glass and that how much is reflected varies with angle.

      What he was thinking about was no doubt his boyfriend. If the glass did not look transparent where he was standing due to reflections and his viewing angle, it would be understandable if he forgot that he was next to something that is transparent when viewed at an angle of incidence of nearly 0. When walking out onto the balcony, he would have been looking approximately towards the sun (perhaps 45 degrees to the side, which is consistent with both the satellite photo of the dock and the picture above). It’s plausible that neither of them knew they would be seen by a number of people.


      i live in Dominica…the sun was not behind the camera man at this time of day, this goes to show you have no idea what you were talking about, there is no way u can stand on the balcony on a ship and see the town clearly below and dont think they can see you

      what he was thinking about was no doubt his boyfriend.
      so you’re trying to say a grown ass ex policeman trained in whatever police officers are trained in and was on the boat for X amount of weeks did not know the glass was transparent? are they installing some new glass on the balcony of ships that are transparent during some hours of the day and opaque at other hours? LOOKEDIN do you know anything about this? Let me give you a crash course on glass, if you walk into a ship and the balcony glass is transparent there is a 99% chance its going to be transparent a few hours later i dont care where the sun is. first of all that happened high day…and the sun was approaching its peak in the sky…so stop brining up the sun in ur argument…

      Apr 5, 2012 at 11:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No. 517 · Looked In and No. 518 · 15 cruise alumni – since these two infants have nothing to contribute, they’ve reduced themselves to using the sort of insults that they should have outgrown by the time they left middle school.

      Re No. 519 · Barnacle: this guy is obviously lying. He stated, “i live in Dominica…the sun was not behind the camera man at this time of day,” but if you look at Queerty’s picture above, you see a guy standing sideways, almost fully lit by the sun except for a small fraction of his face to the right of his nose (he’s looking mostly to the side, but slightly outward). The person holding the camera is facing in the opposite direction. The sun is therefore illuminating his back mostly, and a bit of one side. If you look at a Google satellite image of the dock, the ship should have been pointed north west, with the older guy in the picture looking north (his head is twisted a bit to the side).

      They’d have the sun in their eyes while walking towards the balcony and wouldn’t be able to see very well for some number of seconds when on it. Given their location, they probably could not see through the glass very well: even when looking straight at the glass (see Queerty’s picture above), the contrast is substantially reduced. Looking down at the glass as they would be from their location on the balcony, they might see even less through the glass as its reflectivity varies with the angle of incidence.

      It is plausible that they did not realize that they could be seen. We don’t even know how long they were on the balcony – something that was never reported in the news accounts. Don’t try to give a number as nobody should believe you given that your statement about whether the sun would have been behind the person taking the picture shown above is inconsistent both with that picture and with a Google satellite image of the dock, which shows its orientation.

      Then this fool says, “so you’re trying to say a grown ass ex policeman trained in whatever police officers are trained in and was on the boat for X amount of weeks did not know the glass was transparent?” I was suggesting that, while preoccupied with his boyfriend, he probably only responded to what was obvious visually and aurally. That was pretty damn obvious from what I wrote. The question was not whether there had been any sexual activity – there likely was but it could have been in their room shortly before going out on the balcony. The “evidence” is inconclusive.

      Basically you are assuming a conclusion and looking for factoids that are consistent with it – a good way to fool yourself.

      Apr 5, 2012 at 11:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      LOOKEDIN do you know anything about this? Let me give you a crash course on glass, if you walk into a ship and the balcony glass is transparent there is a 99% chance its going to be transparent a few hours later i dont care where the sun is. first of all that happened high day…and the sun was approaching its peak in the sky…so stop brining up the sun in ur argument

      Barnacle, please, I am 1,000% on your side. Don’t attribute the crap “B” has been spewing to me, okay?

      Apr 6, 2012 at 2:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @Looked In:
      Sorry you miss read i was asking you if you know anythin about ships having glass that are transparent then turn opaque since the men thought they couldnt be seen thru glass. twas a joke :D

      Apr 6, 2012 at 8:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:


      this guy is obviously lying. He stated, “i live in Dominica…the sun was not behind the camera man at this time of day,” but if you look at Queerty’s picture above, you see a guy standing sideways, almost fully lit by the sun except for a small fraction of his face to the right of his nose (he’s looking mostly to the side, but slightly outward). The person holding the camera is facing in the opposite direction. The sun is therefore illuminating his back mostly, and a bit of one side.

      you’re a moron and you’re beginning to invent shit to prove it. The above pictures doesnt prove shit. fully lit by the sun? fool it was DAY of course they were lit by the sun, i dont see any part of them in blazing light of the sun, and for the sun to have affected their vision it would have to be almost same level with the horizon a feat that happens only just before sun set. so shut up. the sun was right above them. its not like they were in a blinding light

      Apr 6, 2012 at 8:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lynn
      lynn

      @DAlady: @ dalady, you covered all the points in a very relevant manner. D/ca is a small island full of gossipy people, Hart & Meyer shouldn’t consider themselves special; that we who live in the US respect the laws of the land & conduct ourselves accordingly. What they did was wrong & their punishment had nothing to do with the fact they are gay.
      Even though the laws are on the books,no one bothers the gay community, they are accepted as every other citizen.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 523 · Barnacle, who should have been talking about himself, wrote, “you’re a moron and you’re beginning to invent shit to prove it. The above pictures doesnt prove shit. fully lit by the sun? fool it was DAY of course they were lit by the sun, i dont see any part of them in blazing light of the sun, and for the sun to have affected their vision it would have to be almost same level with the horizon a feat that happens only just before sun set. so shut up. the sun was right above them. its not like they were in a blinding light”

      Barnacle, I know you are not very bright, however, there is no need to dissemble as you have. If you look at the picture at the start of Queerty’s article, perhaps enlarging it,
      you’ll see that half of a face is in shadow, and there is a lot of light on their balcony. Furthermore, the lifeboat directly below them is lit on the side facing the camera but not the edge nearly but not quite perpendicular to the direction the camera was pointing. That tells you that the camera was most likely shadowed as viewed by the couple on the balcony, who didn’t seem to be looking towards the camera in any case.

      Furthermore, the sun very definitely could affect their vision – if they were previously inside their room with the shades drawn and lights off before they came out (hardly an unusual arrangement if they were having sex in their room), their eyes would have adjusted to the dimmer light in there, so until they adjusted to it, bright sunlight would obviously affect their vision. Spend 30 minutes in a dark room and then go directly outside to see the effect.

      As to your claim that the sun was “right” above them, the picture proves otherwise -look at the lighting on the orange lifeboat, which makes it very obvious – there are no long shadows along the sides as you would expect if the sun was directly above. It is pretty damn obvious that your statements are not reliable.

      If you look at the glass panel in front of them, the portion of them seen through the glass is washed out. That’s due to reflections off of the glass. The amount of reflection varies with the viewing angle and will be different for them than for you. I gave you a reference previously, including graphs for both polarizations. You ignored it. Obviously you don’t want facts to interfere with your preconceptions.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 2:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @B: LMAO!!! B, you are a trip!!! What is your profession? Are you a stand up comedian, a joke writer or just a protagonist that enjoys continually inciting controversy? My guess is the later. I think it is time for everyone that is responding on this site to quit replying to your posts. I’m sure you will move on to other controversial blogs. Hope you enjoy your life.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 8:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 526 · “15 cruise alumni” (whether he actually has been on a cruise is not clear) once again made a fool of himself by trash talking due to not having anything substantive to say.

      Whether he and his “friends” like it or not, the evidence that has been presented is inconclusive as to whether a couple of people on a cruise ship were having sex on a balcony. You can’t tell from the picture – it’s a still image. The alleged witnesses were probably 200 or more feet away (distances to the boat were never mentioned except by one person, who guessed 150 to 225 feet). At that distance, their perceptions were plausibly influenced heavily by their preconceptions. It’s not clear whether the couple on the balcony realized they were being watched. Nor has anyone even given a lower bound on how long they were on that balcony. Was it 1 minute or 10 to 20? Nobody seems to know or is willing to say, including people who claim to have seen the incident. I wonder why.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 9:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      sigh…im getting tired of you, dude they came on a ship, the glass was transparent they knew that. they were on that boat for days. so even if they were blindfolded and on the balcony having sex, the glass was still transparent

      Apr 6, 2012 at 10:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @B: LMAO B. Exactly the response I expected from you. I could detail all 15 Atlantis cruises I’ve been on but I don’t want to overburden you. Go ahead and keep trying to belittle me, I’m enjoying seeing you make a fool of yourself.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 10:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      @Barnacle: Barnacle, save yourself the frustration. We all know what “b” is. I’ve just decided it’s fun to respond so he contines to make a fool of himself.

      Apr 6, 2012 at 10:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      @Barnacle, sorry about that. I was in a hurry when I read what you wrote.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 1:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 528 · Barnacle wrote, “@B: sigh…im getting tired of you, dude they came on a ship, the glass was transparent they knew that. they were on that boat for days. so even if they were blindfolded and on the balcony having sex, the glass was still transparent.”

      You’d get less tired if you improved your reading comprehension. I pointed out that glass partially reflects light and the amount reflected depends on the angle of incidence. The angle of incidence for light going from them to the camera was small. If they looked down, nearly but not quite parallel to the glass, the angle of incidence is nearly but not quite 90 degrees – how easy it is to see through the glass varies with angle, particularly when there can be reflections that interfere with what you see through the glass. Now, go back to the comment where I explained it to you, click on the link, and read the article.

      Re No. 530 · “15 cruise alumni” since your only “contribution” to a discussion seems to be childish insults, why should I believe anything you say? Lots of trolls make claims about themselves that simply aren’t true. Nothing you say will change the fact that the claim that those two guys were having sex, but not just “cuddling” after having sex in their cabin, is unsubstantiated. The picture is ambiguous and the “witnesses” were too far away to tell the difference.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 2:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      Nothing you say will change the fact that the claim that those two guys were having sex, but not just “cuddling” after having sex in their cabin, is unsubstantiated. The picture is ambiguous and the “witnesses” were too far away to tell the difference.

      The truth comes out: “B” wants the video. Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Come on, “B,” are you that hard up for porn?

      Apr 7, 2012 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mdterp01
      Mdterp01

      @Charlie:

      Thank you. People need to stop making it a gay issue. These two apparently have no home training by making such a classless move. I don’t want to see that. It’s not about being a prude either. It’s about knowing there’s a time and place for certain things.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kasnar
      Kasnar

      Now that photos of the incident have surfaced, I suppose many of those previous speculations can now be laid to rest. I still find it hard to believe there was so much speculation on what people standing on the island or on the dock could see or not see. Even harder to believe was all the hair splitting about whether actual penetration occurred in full public view. I mean, come on!! Our little forum here isn’t law school. The fact that they were nude and/or having sex or simulating sex in full public view is all that needs to be said. No rape kits needed.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 533 · Looked In quoted, “Nothing you say will change the fact that the claim that those two guys were having sex, but not just “cuddling” after having sex in their cabin, is unsubstantiated. The picture is ambiguous and the “witnesses” were too far away to tell the difference.”

      …. and then lied by saying, “The truth comes out: “B” wants the video.” What a childish reply, all to cover up the fact that the evidence that these two were having sex on the balcony is rather weak, with sex being only one of several possibilities and with alleged witnesses too far away to determine what was actually going on accurately enough to be credible.

      One has to wonder why it is so important to “Looked In” for him to claim that these two were actually having sex and couldn’t possibly have been doing something else.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 535 · @Kasnar … being nude in public is generally considered to be much less serious than having sex in public. In jurisdictions where being nude in public is illegal, one’s opinion of someone caught being nude in public anyway is going to be different if the person didn’t realize he could be seen than if he was a full-blown exhibitionist.

      Those distinctions are important because comments are being made about these two guys, who almost certainly do not have the resources to counter any inaccurate statements being made about them, whether by the media or by multiple individuals – anything they try to say will be lost in the noise.

      It’s worth pointing out that the photo and witness accounts are not definitive as to what they were doing – there are several behaviors that are consistent with the photo and some are more embarrassing than others. While there was a long discussion, it all resulted from a simple statement suggesting that we should not jump to conclusions. The apparent need to jump to conclusions tells you a lot about certain individuals.

      Apr 7, 2012 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Looked In
      Looked In

      What a childish reply

      Mr. Pot, have you met Mr. Kettle? ROTFLMAO!

      Apr 8, 2012 at 3:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      being naked with ur boyfriend, rubbing ur penis on ur boyfriend, fondling your boyfriend,dry humping your boyfriend all wrong…and we havnt even gotten to the sex yet

      Apr 8, 2012 at 7:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ps guy 2012
      Ps guy 2012

      Very trashy guys. I live in Palm Springs and have seen one of the guys out at the gym. He acts like a total idiot who loves the attention. These guys need to apologize for lying and making this a huge embarrassing gay community issue. Gay or straight public sex anywhere is not tolerated. I’m tired of hearing about this.

      Apr 8, 2012 at 9:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 538 · Looked In acted as lame as usual, showing signs of what psychologists call “projection.”

      No. 539 · Barnacle “@B: being naked with ur boyfriend, rubbing ur penis on ur boyfriend, fondling your boyfriend,dry humping your boyfriend all wrong…and we havnt even gotten to the sex yet.”

      Barnacle’s statements are irrelevant and immaterial – what was being discussed was whether a photo + statements by alleged witnesses allow one to conclude the couple were having sex in public. Perhaps he’s trying to change the topic after realizing that the evidence is not conclusive, although he won’t admit it.

      Interestingly Barnacle showed that he is homophobic too: none of the things he mentions are “wrong” in and of themselves anymore than they would be wrong for a man with his girlfriend or wife, and note that his statements about things being “wrong” were unqualified. Most people wouldn’t do that in public on purpose, but sometimes accidents happen. Like the incident described on an NPR program called “Car Talk”, where some guy had a problem with his car. His wife went off for a bit while he was trying to fix it, and when she returned, she saw two legs sticking out from under the car, with the “owner” of the legs wearing shorts and accidentally having his penis exposed. Thinking it was her husband, she pushed the penis back into the pants so people wouldn’t see it, stood up, and only then saw her husband standing there – he had found a mechanic who was fixing the car and his wife mistook the mechanic for her husband. Now, would you really blame any of these people for what was in fact an accident, and a rather harmless one in the scheme of things?

      Re No 540 (Ps guy 2012): this is not “a huge embarrassing gay community issue” but rather a tempest in a teapot. At most these guys got their 15 minutes of fame/infamy and people went on to more important matters like whether to go out for cocktails before dinner.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 2:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      @B: good on you for continuing to try and explain the obvious. And honestly, if they had evidence of said sex act these guys would be in jail. Because it seems Dominica and that judge are pretty harsh when it comes to those things.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      @15 cruise alumni: thanks for your simply stated reply. And your post does sway me more to your way of thinking that it probably happened. But I do think “B” makes a good point that the photo evidence is not enough.

      oh and cops can make some nice cash plus they get half pay or more I think when they retire.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 1:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No 538 · Looked In – come back when you have something substantive to say.

      Re No. 539 · Barnacle – your statement is unqualified and hence homophobic. There is nothing wrong per se with being “naked with ur [sic] boyfriend” nor the other things you mentioned. Most people simply prefer to keep some things private. It’s a social custom, not a question of “right or wrong”. Perhaps you blurted it out in an attempt to change the subject, which was that the evidence that these guys were in fact having sex in public is rather weak. It’s also possible that they didn’t realize they would be observed while being obviously naked on their balcony for reasons outlined above.

      For those who think whether they were having sex or not is irrelevant, I’ll refer them to Queerty’s article above which stated they were caught having sex. The writer jumped to conclusions, and it is worth pointing out that those conclusions are really conjectures that may or may not be true.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 1:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DB
      DB

      Two separate points here – 1) Are laws against public sex homophobic? No, clearly these men would have been arrested in other countries as well, including America. 2) Is Dominica a homophobic country that should be boycotted by fair-minded people and should the gay community boycott Atlantis Cruises? Yes. Dominica has a law making private gay sex illegal. Fair-minded tourists should never visit or spend one cent in such countries. While the bigotry of the law in Dominica turns out to have been irrelevant to the case of these two men who committed the crime of public sex, the concern about visiting a country where gay sex in private is illegal is completely valid. Please boycott and protest Atlantis Cruises, which is financially supporting homophobia and bigotry.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      B said the following…

      Re No. 539 · Barnacle – your statement is unqualified and hence homophobic. There is nothing wrong per se with being “naked with ur [sic] boyfriend” nor the other things you mentioned.

      IN case you forgot what i said it is the following

      being naked with ur boyfriend, rubbing ur penis on ur boyfriend, fondling your boyfriend,dry humping your boyfriend all wrong…and we havnt even gotten to the sex yet

      So according to B…there is nothing wrong with doing these acts in public. So they doing that at a gym, or a library or a primary school or a press conference there’s nothing wrong in that. Ahhh…ok

      Apr 9, 2012 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 545 · Barnacle wrote, “according to B…there is nothing wrong with doing these acts in public.” Barnacle needs to improve his English skills and needs to improve his honesty – what he calls “these acts” were ones he said were “wrong”, not “wrong in public”.

      I stated that most people prefer to do these acts in private, and pointed out that “It’s a social custom, not a question of ‘right or wrong’.” The phrase “right or wrong” suggests absolutes, which is clearly not appropriate. Unlike Barnacle, some of us are able to distinguish the differences between the words, “wrong,” “rude,” and “illegal.” Some of us even know that social customs vary from one country to the next.

      Barnacle also needs a refresher in Latin, as he seems to have not understood the phrase “per se”. I guess he doesn’t want to admit that he stated that it was wrong for a man to be naked with a boyfriend, with no qualifications as to the circumstances. Sounds kind of homophobic to me, and he has yet to post a correction if that is not what he meant to say.

      Apr 9, 2012 at 5:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TCB
      TCB

      What a couple of hacks….they look as dumb as they obviously are….stop blaming everybody else. Losers

      Apr 9, 2012 at 7:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Barnacle
      Barnacle

      @B:
      Talking to you reminds me of how I felt when I was trying to convince my cousin the easter bunny wasnt real.

      Apr 10, 2012 at 8:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Spike
      Spike

      @Ps guy 2012: Let me guess, it’s the older white guy, the ex-cop that you have seen at the gym acting like an idiot. Shock & awe. Has there been any follow up in the local press in follow up now that it is apparent that they were both playing the gay card and lying when they were interviewed by the local TV station?

      Apr 10, 2012 at 1:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 15 cruise alumni
      15 cruise alumni

      To all of you who are responding to B’s posts, give it up. It is evident B’s main goal is to keep this blog active. No one is going to change B’s thoughts because B has chosen not to let you. Everyone, including me, who responds to the posts is perpetuating B’s self-serving opinions which, as has be deomstrated over and over, will not be changed.

      Almost everyone else contributing to this blog appears to agree that is isn’t a matter of if those two people are having sex or not, it is a matter that two, very apparently, nude humans of any sex should not be in the position those two are in any sort of public setting. Even though B will probably not admit it or not, if those two beings can be captured on film, even by a highly powerful telescopic lens their position is highly inappropriate at best. If a highly powerful telescopic lens could capture the image then anyone closer could also observe the embrace.

      Apr 10, 2012 at 7:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 551 · 15 cruise alumni (after some trash talk) wrote, “Almost everyone else contributing to this blog appears to agree that is isn’t a matter of if those two people are having sex or not, it is a matter that two, very apparently, nude humans of any sex should not be in the position those two are in any sort of public setting.”

      First, Queerty’s article clearly claimed they were having sex based on a photo that is consistent with them either having or not having sex. Second I didn’t blame Dominica for arresting them for nudity, but Dominica did overreact: a small fine payable like a traffic ticket would have sufficed, and would have let them continue on the cruise they paid for.

      Third, it is not clear to what extent someone closer could have seen them: the camera position was clearly pointing left relative to the pier, and as you walk closer to the boat, the partition between balconies will shield more of them – from where the picture was taken, half of one of the two individuals was already shielded from view. From right below their balcony, the floor of the balcony blocks your view. One thing that is missing is a picture of them from that location using a ‘normal’ lens – one with the same field of view (approximately) as a human eye.

      Fourth, from Queerty’s picture, you might not be able to tell if they were wearing certain bikini swim trunks – http://www.cocksox.com/products/category/20/Swimwear has some examples (depending on the fit and suit color, one of the two’s hand and arm could have covered one’s view of this type of swim trunk).

      Now, they apparently admitted to being naked on the balcony, but I would consider neither the photo evidence nor the eye witness accounts I’ve seen as being in any sense proof.

      Apr 11, 2012 at 12:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No. 549 · Barnacle – it seems this guy is now reduced to infantile trash talk.

      Apr 11, 2012 at 12:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 551 · 15 cruise alumni – ignroring his trash talk, his claims miss the point that my comments were about the evidence, not what was “appropriate”, something I was leaving to “Ms Manners”. I might add that if you look at pictures of various Brazilian-style swimsuits marketed to gay men – thongs and ones with very thin straps along the sides similar to the skimpy bikinis some women wear – that sort of suit might not be visible in the picture Queerty showed above – one of the two’s hand and arm would have covered over the suit so they would have appeared to be naked when they weren’t.

      Now, the two claimed they were in fact naked, and I don’t think they would have claimed that if they could have produced a suitably skimpy swim suit, but that has no bearing on the photographic evidence or alleged eye witness accounts, none of which are conclusive.
      The claim that anyone closer than where the picture was taken could “observe the embrace”, assuming one means significantly closer, is a conjecture: the picture was taken with the camera pointing somewhat left instead of directly towards the ship. If taken from the pier, as you walked towards the ship, the partition between the balconies, which already block half of one of the two, would block more of them until they could not be seen at all when right next to the ship.

      So, what a person standing on the pier would see is not clear – we need photos using a normal lens to get a sense of that, plus data about where the photo was taken. All that is missing.

      Apr 11, 2012 at 1:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re No 554 – this is somewhat a duplicate of a previous post, retried because of a temporary glitch on Queerty where a previous post evaporated temporarily. Not sure what causes that behavior.

      Apr 11, 2012 at 12:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George Saint-George
      George Saint-George

      This offense is worst in public and especially where there are local village women & children present (which in many island ports there are). I personally think that if you hump in public you’re doing it to purposely offend. Especially these poor people who probably have to sell sombreros and trinkets port side to put food on the table. They’re just sold their last hand crafted basket they look up at the giant white floating palace and “Look there’s some Americans humping like the animals in the jungle” Truly classy.

      May 3, 2012 at 5:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dang
      Dang

      Apparently a lot of gays think gay sex is shameful. The people on the Shore were using binoculars and telephoto lenses. They came to gawk at the gay cruise, whose arrival had prompted a religious protest on the island. Whose side are you on? Many of you would happily join your own persecutors because you hate yourselves.

      May 16, 2012 at 3:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brendan Kissam
      Brendan Kissam

      @Scott:
      Do you mean the video that was shot by an onlooker, as opposed to the fixed security cameras? Moving cameras tell whatever story they want to. Fixed ones do not. Btw, what do George Zimmermann’s medical reports say? Two black eyes, among other injuries. But no, you must be right; Trayvon Martin only wanted Skittles…

      May 16, 2012 at 5:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joe
      Joe

      Nobody wins. Atlantis looks like a bunch of apologists who will go anywhere and say anything to make a buck – and these two come off like narcissistic lunkheads looking for notoriety (not because they were horny and had sex – but for doing it in a very risky place and then whining about the fallout).

      The good news is that I reject the idea that this somehow reflects badly “on the gay community” – there were thousands of guys on that ship who went to town, enjoyed the day, interacted with the locals and had a great time.

      This was two idiots out of a couple of thousand – something straight people can identify with as well.

      All is well men.

      May 16, 2012 at 10:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • leet
      leet

      Lucky they got sodomy charges thrown out! They should have been charged with it since what they were doing was sodomy. The only reason the Dominican courts lowered the charges was because they knew the US State Department would’ve caused hell.

      May 16, 2012 at 11:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • StevenX
      StevenX

      The next time you wonder why gays don’t have equal rights yet, remember that cartoon losers like these are the only gays a lot of people see in the media, reinforcing the stereotype of classless world’s-oldest-twink nymphos (especially now that Daddy has Viagra)that have no respect for anything that doesn’t have a PA through it. If I won Lotto, the first thing I’d do is offer them a million bucks to go straight so we aren’t saddled with their image.

      May 18, 2012 at 12:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Phoenix28
      Phoenix28

      People look over the real problem here…. Had they been straight… they would have gotten off with a fine and a night in jail(which is what they plead down to eventually). However, because of the antigay laws there… they were facing 14 yrs in prison for being trolly on a gay cruise marked at trolly!!?? They were drunk idiots…sure! Anyone even somewhat interesting has been a drunk idiot at some point in their lives… should 14 yrs in prison be the punishment for this kind of stupid? Mile high club is promoted in culture as being acceptable as long as you don’t get caught. So… is their crime being stupid and gay? Does the stupid AND gay add 14 yrs?

      May 20, 2012 at 2:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mj.
      mj.

      Correction, Mile High Club is promoted in YOUR culture not ours. And the real problem is that tourists, mostly Americans sadly, go on vacation and leave their damn brains at home. They forget that they’re going to a place with set laws and customs. Again, the fact that you’re on vacation does not give you the right to publicly break laws and basically spit on their customs. How much time would I get for having sex on the Statue of Liberty? And how do you know what would have happened if they were straight? I have a lot of respect for the gay community. I don’t have gay friends, I have friends who are gay. I consider it a part of them. But I don’t approve of that kind of behavior in public. Not by anyone.

      May 20, 2012 at 1:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Heather
      Heather

      @Kim123: @mj.: @mj.: I agree no problem with gay people. I do have a problem with this though. There are alot of kids on the docks of that beautiful Island. This would be a problem no mater what man-on-man, man-on woman, woman-on-woman.

      May 23, 2012 at 10:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CowboyPhil
      CowboyPhil

      @Johnny: REALLY! Vacation is about being able F**K whereever you want. NO! There are apartments and offices right outside that port and easily seen. They were being indecent.

      Jul 10, 2012 at 2:10 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

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

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