|
|
|
erotica  fictiongallerylifestyles fetishbdsmqueer/bi/transswingersfeatures news briefsarticlessexy spreadseros bits sound offtriviasexfessionsreviewsevents sf archiveslondon archiveslos angeles archivesnew york archiveslas vegas archivesinternational calendareros photo classified ads about eros ezine daily cartoon select different zine:
|
 Tinkering continues on Britain’s controversial Sexual Offences Bill, with the most recent skirmish being over whether the Home Office’s proposal adequately deals with what conservatives consider the problem of gay men having sex in public lavatories. Yesterday in the Lords, peers backed a Conservative move to amend the current bill to more explicitly outlaw buggery in public bogs.  Peers on all sides of the House had protested before the move that the Government's plans to change the law would give the green light to gay men to have sex in public toilets. Voting was 133 to 95 majority 38.Evidently Conservatives, backed by some Opposition peers and crossbenchers, feel that the reality of “decent people” the country over is in danger of falling apart under the weight of “cottaging” by gay men. This “coalition of the schilling” fretted that the bill’s repealing of the gross indecency offence, without being replaced by equally explicit measures. The Home Office insisted that the bill already contained language which would protect the public from such an affront on decency. Opposition disagreed. According to the Guardian, Baroness Noakes, Opposition frontbench spokesman, said Blair’s bill wasn’t up to snuff, and failed to make explicit the government’s intolerance of such behavior. "And that applies whether or not it is happening behind the doors of a locked cubicle. We think that is what decent people in our country want. They want public lavatories that they can use and more importantly, their children can use without worrying what else might be happening," the Baroness said. A public health issue, eh? Well, god knows I wouldn’t want me or my nonexistent children to have to worry about gay men having a go in the same place where a guy who looks like Austin Powers’ Fat Bastard has just lifted up his kilt and had a steaming hot three-pound shite made of Newcastle and sausage. Sisters are doing it for themselves Two sisters who masterminded a sex slave ring made of hundreds of Thai girls were imprisoned last week after pleading guilty to felony charges. Bupha Savada, 45, and Monporn Hughes, 40, received fairly light sentences considering the presiding judge called it “one of the most serious cases” he’d ever seen. Savada received a sentence of five years, Hughes three-and-a-half. Savada and Hughes ran 15 brothels in London, where girls and women, mostly brought under false pretenses from Thailand, were forced to have sex with men, sometimes unprotected. The girls were promised custodial positions, but were instead trained and forced into sex slavery. The women were told they would have to earn almost £50,000 before securing their freedom. This roughly translated into having sex with 500 men.  One of the slaves, an 18-year-old Thai girl known as Mary Pondee, said she was recruited at the age of 16. She left working in the rice fields under the promise she would earn twice as much in a month as she earned in a year at home.Pondee stated she had to borrow £650 for false documents and flight arrangements, only to be shipped to a brothel. She was told there would be grim consequences for her family were she to refuse to “work” for Savada and Hughes. Savada’s husband, who worked in the operation by advertising the girls’ “services,” was also sentenced to two years. After the sentencing Judge Paul Dodgson demonstrated his disdain for the sisters and their abhorrent crimes. "Each of the girls you controlled had to perform sexual acts with literally hundreds of men. These were girls in a foreign land totally dependent upon you and you used them as animals," Dodgson said. That’s as may be, but I dare say some animals are treated better. Too close for comfort? Authorities in Edinburgh have threatened to lock the doors of a local lingerie shop unless the owner “significantly reduces” his stock of sex toys. The owner of Leather and Lace on Gorgie Road, a man with the almost improbable name of Vincent Delicato (domo arigato, Mr. Delicato), was served a notice last week by officers who said the store would be shut down if their demands weren’t met.  What the officers demanded was that Delicato remove a number of sexual items from lingerie store. The owner had previously sought a sex shop license, but faced fierce local opposition based on the store’s close proximity to not one, but two special schools. He instead opened it as a lingerie shop.The only problem, says Delicato, is that the officers have failed to explicitly outline what that number is, or what constitutes a “significant” reduction. "The problem is that it is a matter of opinion,” Delicato told an Edinburgh paper. “I ran my boutique in Drummond Street with the same type and amount of stock and I had no issues with licensing people. All I am asking for is set of guidelines written down so I can see what I can and cannot stock. They are threatening my other businesses, which is like blackmail.” "They are trying to stop me earning a living when all this is down to a difference of opinion," he said. The owner insists that he is ready and willing to cooperate with authorities, as soon as they provide him with an inventory of what is unacceptable for the store to stock. Not surprisingly, the cops disagree. "We have explained in detail our concerns and position to Mr Delicato on numerous occasions,” a spokeswoman for Lothian and Borders Police said. “We have contacted him a number of times and visited the shop several times to have meetings with him. We have clearly explained and pointed out items that are not suitable for display on the premises for an unlicensed shop." Here’s hoping this matter gets resolved before there’s a showdown at Dildo Corral.
|
|
|
 |
|