Remember when that El Paso restaurant kicked out two men who dared kiss on their premises? Turns out something similar allegedly went down in San Francisco’s Laurel Heights district. Except this incident comes with a crazy ass statement from the bar, Internos Wine Cafe, alleging the man who smooched also began to disrobe.
Boyfriends Joshua Barry and Sebastian Schilbe’s version of what went down the night of July 31 — they asked if there was an ATM, were told no, then shared a smooch before being called “faggots” and “perverts” by the bar’s owner — differs quite a bit from Internos’ account. This was posted on the website of Internos (describe by one Yelp reviewer as “Small and WAY too Yuppie”). Emphasis ours:
We are deeply saddened by an event that took place on Friday, July 31st at our establishment at around midnight. Two gentlemen entered the bar and asked the whereabouts of the nearest ATM machine. The staff then informed them that there was an ATM two blocks away. They said thank you and proceeded to go and use the
single stall bathroom together. They did not order anything from our bar. After exiting the bathroom they walked through the establishment as if to leave. It was then brought to our attention by paying customers at the bar that there was some
inappropriate behavior taking place. It was observed by the bar full of 10-12 people that these two men were making out, hands in each other’s pants and began disrobing from the waist down. At that point a staff member stepped out from behind the bar quickly to get their attention. He first asked them to leave and then had to escort them out of the bar forcefully when the two men became confused and aggressive. There were absolutely no derogatory terms exchanged. The two men were acting inappropriately and were disrupting the peaceful operation of our establishment.
The Saturday night after the fracas, some 50 folks appeared outside Internos and staged one of America’s fastest growing pop-up parties: the kiss in.
Let’s just hope this event is another scenario where gays cry wolf, like Nick Haramis apparently did in New York City. But from the sound of Internos’ own statement, which claims Barry and Schilbe “began disrobing from the waist down,” it sounds preposterous to believe the restaurant’s claim. We think.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Lloyd Baltazar
Yeah, sadly, there are gay guys who want to show their exhibitionism and perform sexual acts in that public space as a sign of their fetish. Since they did not order anything, it was only right for them to get kicked out.
Donald
If there were 10 – 12 people that observed this, it should be easy for the owner to find them and have them verify the facts. That would make it less of a he said/he said issue and clear things.
Cam
I’m surprised that nobody pulled out a phone cam and snapped a shot.
M Shane
While it seems insanely imaginative that in San Francisco people would be thrown out for kissing, there certainly are bigots in the city who would resent that . The descripton seems shoddy: that when they were confronted, they “became confused'”, which I don’t think would happen if they were acting inappropriately. It’s true that people at one time had some semi-public sex , but not in a wine bar.
People assume that in a place like San Francisco there wouldn’t be prejudice, but there are some very anti gay people in places.
Dave
SF isn’t the Utopia a lot of people make it out to be. There is a HUGE conservative base. A friend of mine is kind of part of it and I always try to get her side of things before coming to any judgements.
B.
This story was covered in local Bay-Area news outlets. It seems these guys are partly changing their story (mostly regarding details about complaining to the police) and stopped returning calls from the press (in this case, the Bay Area Reporter, which is local gay publication). The wine bar isn’t returning calls either.
http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=4135 has the latest(?) update on the story. If the two alleged victims are changing part of their story and refusing to return calls from gay news outlets, the most likely reason is obvious.
The article in the URL above was published on 08/13/2009, one day before the queerty.com article appeared, so I’d imagine that the ebar.com one is more up to date given that this particular news source is located in San Francisco.
jason
I was in a mainstream bar once where two guys were kissing in a modest fashion. This was a Saturday night, a night that was not designated “gay” or “mixed”. The manager told the two guys to cool it.
I then took the manager to task and asked him if he would tell the hetero couples to cool it too. His response was that the guys were putting their hands down each other’s pants, something I truly doubted as I had been there the whole time.
Bottom line is this: mainstream bar managers are notoriously uncomfortable with displays of male-male affection. They are terrified of the notion of male-male sexuality.
TeleUte83
What a great way to ruin a restaurant competitor in gay-friendly areas methinks.
M Shane
Because San Francisco is undoubtedly one of he most desirable places to live in the U.S., you can be very sure that there are hyperconservative as well a gay people living there. It’s great as long as people don’t make the mistake of getting wires crossed. Some well to do people are really hostile to the fact that gay people are so potent there.
Remember that Dan White only got a 5 yr sentance of which he served 2 1/2 for murdering Milk.
B.
M Shane wrote, “Some well to do people are really hostile to the fact that gay people are so potent there. Remember that Dan White only got a 5 yr sentance of which he served 2 1/2 for murdering Milk.”
Except the 5 year sentence was for murdering both Harvey Milk and San Francisco’s mayor George Miscone, and Miscone was straight. White got off easy, but homophobia can’t explain it since he also murdered a straight guy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone–Milk_assassinations#Trial_and_its_aftermath points out:
White was tried for first degree murder with special circumstance, a crime which potentially carried the death penalty in California. White’s defense team claimed that he was depressed, evidenced by, among other things, his eating of unhealthy foods (inaccurate media reports that White’s defense had presented junk food consumption as the cause of his mental state, rather than a symptom of it, would give rise to the legal term “Twinkie defense”). The defense argued that White’s depression led to a state of mental diminished capacity, leaving him unable to have formed the premeditation necessary to commit first-degree murder. The jury accepted these arguments, and White was found guilty of the lesser crime of voluntary manslaughter.
After White’s parole, and before his suicide a couple of years later, White told a police officer he knew that the murders were premeditated, according to the officer he allegedly spoke to. That confession suggests that justice was not served but his suicide leaves doubt about his mental condition. Ironically, he might have lived longer if he had received a death sentence given the mean time between conviction and execution.