When Same Sex Couples Kiss in Public

When Same Sex Couples Kiss in Public

There are 232 comments on the www.womanist-musings.com story from Oct 25, 2011, titled When Same Sex Couples Kiss in Public. In it, www.womanist-musings.com reports that:

Kissing, kissing, kissing, such a simple thing right? I mean, most couples do it and quite a few are quite willing to do it in public as well. Of course, we may roll our eyes over people who are outright tongue wrestling in the public street – but precious few of us complain about the odd peck. It's a very standard part of our view.

Well... except in same-sex couples. Then that can get you thrown out of pubs. It can get you kicked off planes. It can certainly get your head kicked in. A television programme with a same-sex kiss? Oh you're bound to get a gazillion complaints. How daaaare you. Even now there's yet another study on shoving our affection after the watershed to protect the delicate gazes of straight people.

I don't kiss Beloved outside the house. I want to, but I don't. It has become something hidden, something concealed. Something I have to restrict to behind close doors. In some ways, I have to treat kissing him as a sex act.

And the excuses we hear from those determined not to allow us this simplest act of affection.

“People complained” “People were offended.” “There are Children watching” “This is a family area”

Oh I love that protest. “We're not raging bigots – we just accede to their wishes!” Like that's even an excuse! Like that makes you one iota less of a homophobe!

Why does it offend people? Why must we protect the gaze of straight people from our affection? We see kisses all the time – do these people walk through life being permanently offended? Kissing is on every channel! In so many books, in so much media, in adverts!

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.womanist-musings.com.

First Prev
of 12
Next Last

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#1 Oct 25, 2011
When gays kiss in public all hell breaks loose from the bigots.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#2 Oct 25, 2011
Why are same-sex kisses blurred out as if it is nudity?

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#4 Oct 25, 2011
equalityboy81 wrote:
Why are same-sex kisses blurred out as if it is nudity?
Nudity is not necesserily forbidden either.

In New York State, the law for the past 30 years is that a woman can be bare-breasted in public anywhere a man can be. Women are allowed to breastfeed in public, in restaurants, etc. and the law specifically protectes them.

A judge in New York recently ruled that women can appear nude in public, walking down the street in Manhattan.

Now what's odd about this, is that although it is perfectly legal, the newspapers and other news media would show a bare-chested man in public, but not a bare-breasted woman beside him.

Why is that if it's perfectly legal. Why are women's nipples such a taboo ?

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#5 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Nudity is not necesserily forbidden either.
In New York State, the law for the past 30 years is that a woman can be bare-breasted in public anywhere a man can be. Women are allowed to breastfeed in public, in restaurants, etc. and the law specifically protectes them.
A judge in New York recently ruled that women can appear nude in public, walking down the street in Manhattan.
Now what's odd about this, is that although it is perfectly legal, the newspapers and other news media would show a bare-chested man in public, but not a bare-breasted woman beside him.
Why is that if it's perfectly legal. Why are women's nipples such a taboo ?
B/c str8 men think of(women) them as sex objects. More so then not.

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#6 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Nudity is not necesserily forbidden either.
In New York State, the law for the past 30 years is that a woman can be bare-breasted in public anywhere a man can be. Women are allowed to breastfeed in public, in restaurants, etc. and the law specifically protectes them.
A judge in New York recently ruled that women can appear nude in public, walking down the street in Manhattan.
Now what's odd about this, is that although it is perfectly legal, the newspapers and other news media would show a bare-chested man in public, but not a bare-breasted woman beside him.
Why is that if it's perfectly legal. Why are women's nipples such a taboo ?
Well, that has to do with the sexual objectification of women by a patriarchal society, coupled with the paradoxical puritanical public prudishness about sexuality in America, even as we surround and bombard ourselves with sexual imagery.

It was not so long ago that it was considered utterly obscene for a woman to allow her ankles to show in public. When speaking of a women, "legs" was considered to be a word one didn't say in polite company.

But as a practical matter, I think women cover their breasts for the simple reason that they want at least occasional eye-contact from heterosexual men.

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#7 Oct 25, 2011
ScottyMatic wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, that has to do with the sexual objectification of women by a patriarchal society, coupled with the paradoxical puritanical public prudishness about sexuality in America, even as we surround and bombard ourselves with sexual imagery.
It was not so long ago that it was considered utterly obscene for a woman to allow her ankles to show in public. When speaking of a women, "legs" was considered to be a word one didn't say in polite company.
But as a practical matter, I think women cover their breasts for the simple reason that they want at least occasional eye-contact from heterosexual men.
I have occasionally seen bare-breasted women on tv (commercial tv, not the porn channel), and nudity on tv also. Although admittedly rare, it does happen from time to time, and there doesn't seem to be a big outcry about it.

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#8 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
I have occasionally seen bare-breasted women on tv (commercial tv, not the porn channel), and nudity on tv also. Although admittedly rare, it does happen from time to time, and there doesn't seem to be a big outcry about it.
That depends on what "TV" you're talking about. Cable channels do not have the same standards restrictions as broadcast TV in America. And things such as profanity and some degrees of nudity are allowed late at night when "children are not likely to be watching."

Consider though, that it has been commonplace to see female full frontal nudity in American cinema for decades, but male full frontal nudity is still a monstrous Hollywood taboo.
Baba Louie

Pleasantville, NJ

#9 Oct 25, 2011
ScottyMatic wrote:
<quoted text>
Consider though, that it has been commonplace to see female full frontal nudity in American cinema for decades, but male full frontal nudity is still a monstrous Hollywood taboo.
As it should be. Nobody wants to see that.

“Greetings!”

Since: Dec 06

Tampa, FL

#10 Oct 25, 2011
I very much identify with the authors post regarding simiple display's of affection (a simple kiss). Having once been married to a woman (i didn't come out till my mid 30's, it was a big adjustment to NOT showing basic affection to my male partner.

I have to echo the authors point about kissing, i don't think french kissing is appropriate in ANY public place (restaurnt, bus, train, etc.) But to NOT feel safe kissing your parnter goodbye at the airport is arcane!

Now, our society has changed alot in the past few years and i feel more at ease sneaking a kiss once in a while, but my partner, he's afraid we'll get targeted and attacked. I'm working this thru with him, we now have a few bars, restaurants and other social places we know are safe for us to show affection (hold hands, simple kiss, a hug)....but really, why is it when bigots see 2 men kiss, all they think of is anal sex? We sure don't think that when we're doing it....why the obsession?

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#11 Oct 25, 2011
As to kissing in public. Get over it, everyone. I've never worried about it, though some of my partners did.

Let's make a distinction... if there is tongue involved, that's not just a kiss--it's foreplay, and that is, more or less, overtly sexual.

However, the affectionate peck is absolutely, perfectly acceptable in public. Heterosexual people do that all the time. And whether it makes you uncomfortable or not generally depends on the health of your own intimate relationships. When one is in love, one sees love all around. When one is not, another couple kissing only aggravates one's sense of lonliness.

But if a bar or coffee shop is going to give you grief over holding hands, hugging, or the occasional affectionate kiss... give them hell. If they don't zing the heterosexual folk for the exact same behaviors, then it's name is homophobia, plain and simple. Complaints from other customers? Well make your own complaint that those customers are making a public display of their anti-gay bigotry.

A "family area?" Nearly two million kids in America are being raised by same-sex parent couples. On what grounds could anyone justify telling those kids that their parents are not allowed to show affection in public, when it's fine for the heteros?

I have a zero tolerance policy on homophobia. Wanna kick me out of public accomodation because you have a problem with gay couples? I'll sue you. Just try me!

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#12 Oct 25, 2011
Baba Louie wrote:
<quoted text>
As it should be. Nobody wants to see that.
You are clearly a fool. Why must you be foolish in public? Nobody wants to see that.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#13 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Nudity is not necesserily forbidden either.
In New York State, the law for the past 30 years is that a woman can be bare-breasted in public anywhere a man can be. Women are allowed to breastfeed in public, in restaurants, etc. and the law specifically protectes them.
A judge in New York recently ruled that women can appear nude in public, walking down the street in Manhattan.
Now what's odd about this, is that although it is perfectly legal, the newspapers and other news media would show a bare-chested man in public, but not a bare-breasted woman beside him.
Why is that if it's perfectly legal. Why are women's nipples such a taboo ?
looks what's happened just since the super bowl fiasco with justin timberlake and janet jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" a few years ago. the fed commission in charge of the airwaves has cracked down on "offensive" material being aired.

my spouse & i don't have PDA, not even hand holding. the closest thing to that is when we both hold our youngest hands because she initiates it when we're out walking in public places. and then we have to explain the teens in the mall making a spectacle of themselves while they're making out and groping.

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#14 Oct 25, 2011
ScottyMatic wrote:
<quoted text>
That depends on what "TV" you're talking about. Cable channels do not have the same standards restrictions as broadcast TV in America. And things such as profanity and some degrees of nudity are allowed late at night when "children are not likely to be watching."
Consider though, that it has been commonplace to see female full frontal nudity in American cinema for decades, but male full frontal nudity is still a monstrous Hollywood taboo.
I'm talking about regular over-the-air, not cable tv. Some examples are "My Breast" starring Meredith Baxter, the original "Tall Blond Man With One Black Shoe", and Schindler's list. I saw all of these on over-the-air non-cable tv, and they all featured nudity. Although rare, it DOES occur and there wasn't an outcry about it when I saw them on tv.

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#15 Oct 25, 2011
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
looks what's happened just since the super bowl fiasco with justin timberlake and janet jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" a few years ago. the fed commission in charge of the airwaves has cracked down on "offensive" material being aired.
my spouse & i don't have PDA, not even hand holding. the closest thing to that is when we both hold our youngest hands because she initiates it when we're out walking in public places. and then we have to explain the teens in the mall making a spectacle of themselves while they're making out and groping.
I think the jackson waldrobe malfunction wsa blown way out of proportion, that the FCC was wrong, and there should have been no sanction of any kind.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#16 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the jackson waldrobe malfunction wsa blown way out of proportion, that the FCC was wrong, and there should have been no sanction of any kind.
i don't know, i think ol' justin timberlake should've been slapped lightly for at the very least "groping" on her breast on live tv since it was his action that caused the breast to be exposed.

it wasn't appropriate for the event.

i might understand some instances but not those types of events. or maybe more adult oriented viewing (some television shows).

i recall a few yrs back when saving private ryan aired on network tv for the first time, there was no editing of the dialogue and there was quite the furor for allowing the profanity (f-bombs) being kept in the movie, considering the time slot it was aired in.

or what about back in the early 90s, the cop show NYPD Blue that showed David Frantz's bare bottom in a shot? that was pretty gnarly and not necessary. was done just for shock value.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#17 Oct 25, 2011
What is kind of ironic is that is some of the most macho and potentially homophobic societies, men often do kiss in public, though as a greeting and not romantically.

Go to Italy, for example, and you'll see lots of straight dudes kissing each other.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#19 Oct 25, 2011
It is amazing how backward we can be sometimes. In Europe, the human body is not something that should be hidden, here it is dirty. We are perfectly happy to see graphic murder on TV, but anything related to nudity is taboo. How silly.

As to PDA, some caution still needs be taken in some areas, but it is getting better. The more gay people are seen as couples, the more other people will get used to and accept.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#20 Oct 25, 2011
Ron431 wrote:
It is amazing how backward we can be sometimes. In Europe, the human body is not something that should be hidden, here it is dirty. We are perfectly happy to see graphic murder on TV, but anything related to nudity is taboo. How silly.
As to PDA, some caution still needs be taken in some areas, but it is getting better. The more gay people are seen as couples, the more other people will get used to and accept.
Nudity not even be sexual but stupid people in your country, moreso than probably anywhere else on the planet, equate nudity with sex. One cannot even take a picture of an infant in a bath tub without being accused of pedophilia there.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#21 Oct 25, 2011
Sorry for typos in previous post.

Should read

"Nudity need not be sexual...more so"

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#22 Oct 25, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm talking about regular over-the-air, not cable tv. Some examples are "My Breast" starring Meredith Baxter, the original "Tall Blond Man With One Black Shoe", and Schindler's list. I saw all of these on over-the-air non-cable tv, and they all featured nudity. Although rare, it DOES occur and there wasn't an outcry about it when I saw them on tv.
Thanks for the specific examples. The original "Tall Blond Man with One Black Shoe" (great film) was French. It was made in '72, and I doubt that in that era it was aired unedited. I've seen it recently on broadcast TV, and the nude scene was censored. When I saw Shindler's list on network TV, it was similarly censored.

Broadcasters face such ridiculous penalties if charged with indecency that they most often err on the side of extreme caution, though things have been loosening up after 10 p.m. Still, the problem lies in the fact that the FCC only gives a very vague and fuzzy description of what would constitute "indecency." Here is their three-pronged litmus test:

*An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;

*The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and

*The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Just think about that last part. If, as many philosophers have observed, it is impossible to define what is "art" in any meaningful way which is definitively inclusive or exclusive, then it is likewise impossible to judge that ANYTHING "lacks serious artistic value." It may be argued that South Park deliberately describes sexual activity in a patently offensive way, but that it has serious artistic and political value.

There is no rule which says that you can't show naked boobs on TV. But, if even a miniscule fraction of the audience complains to the FCC, they can claim proof of indecency evidenced by the fact that people complained.

In the case of the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction, over 140 millions of people tuned in to that broadcast. The FCC recieved 540 thousand complaints. That's roughly one third of one percent of the audience. The momentary flash of Janet's breast was unintentional, and certainly unplanned by the newtork, but the FCC tried to fine them a dollar per complaint...$540,000,(Thankful ly, a reasonable U.S. Appeals Court threw it out.)

The thing to realize is that the FCC is much more a political machine than it is a policing agency. Their job is to generate revenue, not to protect the decency of the public airwaves, even though that's what is claimed.

Enforcement is usually arbitrary, and depends on whether a substantial number of people complain about something.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 12
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Choose not to be gay 17 min cpeter1313 541
News New research says sex education ignores gay and... 18 min WasteWater 1,286
News Venue owners appeal fine for denying lesbian co... 34 min Prep-for-Dep 57
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... 36 min Friend of Frankie 9,138
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 1 hr Horace 68,625
News Lewisburg council weighs additions to nondiscri... 1 hr Rainbow Kid 6
Why did the gay cowboy take off his boots? 1 hr Gary 3
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Respect7l 30,803
More from around the web