repost from national gay and lesbian task force | 30.08.2007 10:24

The hypocrisy knows no bounds. While the powerful get their sex in public men's rooms, us "normal" people who negotiate for it online are about to be criminalized. Read what the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has to say about proposed rule changes that will have the FBI collecting and storing info on your sex partners - more warrantless searches - woohoo.

"The federal government is proposing regulations that would effectively kill adult social-networking sites. This is being done under the guise of fighting child pornography. You have until September 10 to object to these regulations. It’s easy to do and essential...Obviously, none of this has anything to do with child pornography. Instead, it is a blatant attempt to end the ability of consenting adults to use adult social-networking sites to meet other people for sex..."

comment from Gadfly: I guess they're milking it for all it's worth before attempting to shut it down. How's this for a laugh/puke?

comment from queer-j-brad: i'm not happy about defending a vile creature like larry craig, but the outrage, shaking of heads, and throwing around of phrases like closet cases and hypocrisy is just too much to bear.

1 - who decided that having sex in public men's rooms with men means that a guy is gay? that's ridiculous! lots of straight men have sex with men, especially oral sex - trust me. are people living in some kind of christian fantasy theme park world on this one, for crying out loud? so when larry craig says he is not gay, he is very likely telling the truth.

2 - however disgusting it might be, it's perfectly logical to have sex with men in men's rooms at the same time as opposing civil rights for queers. i'm sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no hypocrisy here.

3 - why is everyone believing that ridiculous cop report? COPS LIE! --Read More--(scroll down)

for report, click here

The federal government is proposing regulations that would effectively kill adult social-networking sites. This is being done under the guise of fighting child pornography. You have until September 10 to object to these regulations. It’s easy to do and essential. A sample e-mail comment is at the bottom of this page. Please forward this information to your friends!
What’s the Deal?

The Department of Justice is proposing regulations to implement a federal law designed to combat child pornography, known as Section 2257. The law was first enacted in 1998 and was amended in 2006 and significantly expanded to include regulation of the Internet.

While many of the regulations pertain to companies that produce adult entertainment magazines and videos (and are extremely burdensome), they would also affect anyone who uses an adult social-networking site. Here’s how:

* The regulations would require the people running a site to get and maintain personal information from every user (that means you) who posts a “sexually explicit” photo, including your photo ID (driver’s license, passport, or military ID).
* The regulations would allow the Attorney General to conduct warrantless searches at will on the sites’ records, including your personal information.
* There are few safeguards over what the FBI can do with the information it obtains.
* If a site operator fails to comply with the regulations, he or she would face a prison sentence of up to 5 years.
* For more detailed information on Sec. 2257, click here.

Obviously, none of this has anything to do with child pornography. Instead, it is a blatant attempt to end the ability of consenting adults to use adult social-networking sites to meet other people for sex. Obviously, if these regulations go into effect, they will kill this industry.
What You Can Do

The Department of Justice has published these proposed regulations and the public has until September 10 to comment on them.

We need to generate thousands of comments objecting to the proposed regulations – and it’s easy to do via e-mail. Just follow the instructions below.
Why We’re Involved

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Inc. is involved in this fight because we believe sexual freedom is a fundamental human right and we don’t think the government has any place in relations between consenting adults. These regulations are part of our government’s hypocritical and punitive views about sex, sexuality, and reproductive rights. All of this – from abstinence-only sex education programs to the elimination of funding for accurate and explicit HIV prevention programs – fall hardest on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

For more information about the organizing, advocacy, and public education work of the Task Force, click here.
Take Action Now

Here is a sample letter with the e-mail address you need to send it to (Admin.ceos@usdoj.gov) and the subject you must include in the subject line of your e-mail (Section 2257 Docket No. CRM 104).

Please also consider a contribution to keep this advocacy work going.

Donate

Sample Letter
To: Admin.ceos@usdoj.gov
Re: Section 2257 Docket No. CRM 104

To the U.S. Department of Justice:

I am writing to object to the proposed “Section 2257” regulations.

These regulations are complicated and burdensome on legitimate businesses, and have very little to do with protecting children and minors from pornography. Their reach — particularly into adult social-networking internet services — is overbroad, unnecessary, and would allow the federal government to search and seize personal records of adult consumers without a warrant; a clear violation privacy and constitutional rights.

Specifically, I object to the following provisions:

1. The regulations (18 § 2257(b)(1) and (c)) would force adult social-networking services to obtain and maintain personal information about their users, including the user's photo ID (driver’s license, passport, or military ID). (I must note that the sites already require users to affirm that they are over 18 years of age.) Many sites have tens of thousands of users and it is simply not possible for them to do this. Moreover, many people who use these sites want to maintain their privacy, for any number of reasons, including the sad fact that they might face discrimination and/or violence if others found out they were using these sites. It is still legal in 31 states to discriminate against someone who is gay or bisexual, and in 41 states if the person is transgender. The combination of the recordkeeping requirements and many users’ fears about providing such information will kill the entire industry.

All of this is overkill given that adult social networking sites were not identified as a problem in the production, distribution and downloading of child pornography in the Department of Justice’s own report on “Child Pornography on the Internet” (May 2006).

2. The regulations (18 § 2257(g) and under 28 C.F.R. § 75.5) would allow the Attorney General to conduct unannounced warrantless searches at will on the sites’ records, including reviewing and presumably seizing the personal information on site users. This is an egregious abuse of government authority, an unwarranted invasion of privacy and, in my opinion, a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

3. The regulations (28 C.F.R. § 75.5(4)) provide insufficient safeguards over what the government can do with the information it obtains through its searches. This, by itself, has a chilling effect on the ability of people to engage in constitutionally protected activities. As noted above, this is particularly dangerous for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

Let me be clear: I believe children need to be protected from coercion into pornography and it is important for the federal government to do all that it can to insure those protections. Sadly, many of the provisions of the proposed 2257 regulations do nothing to address child pornography, but instead are clearly aiming at destroying an industry and ending a legal and valuable way for adults to meet one another.

Sincerely, (your name)

Let's try this again 30.08.2007 17:20 I guess they're milking it for all it's worth before attempting to shut it down. How's this for a laugh/puke?  http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/m4m/409197893.html Gadfly i hate to defend larry craig, but... 31.08.2007 09:37 i'm not happy about defending a vile creature like larry craig, but the outrage, shaking of heads, and throwing around of phrases like closet cases and hypocrisy is just too much to bear. 1 - who decided that having sex in public men's rooms with men means that a guy is gay? that's ridiculous! lots of straight men have sex with men, especially oral sex - trust me. are people living in some kind of christian fantasy theme park world on this one, for crying out loud? so when larry craig says he is not gay, he is very likely telling the truth. 2 - however disgusting it might be, it's perfectly logical to have sex with men in men's rooms at the same time as opposing civil rights for queers. i'm sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no hypocrisy here. 3 - why is everyone believing that ridiculous cop report? COPS LIE! they especially lie about people who are feeling vulnerable, as larry craig certainly was if he was even thinking about sex. there is no way larry craig could have indulged for decades as reports seem to indicate if he was pursuing dudes who weren't responding, as the cop claims. more likely, the cop was the aggressor, entrapped craig, and made most or all of that report up. as a public figure, craig couldnt challenge it - if it comes out, everyone assumes you are guilty, which is precise what has happened. 4 - if larry craig happens to be a closet gay or closet bi or closet straight who likes to have sex with men or closet whatever, why are people treating that as a personal failing? please stop talking about 'closet cases,' dammit. being in the closet is a totally reasonable response to the hateful culture we live in - it's not reflective of a personal failing, but rather of a societal failing. 5 - why are people treating having sex is public men's rooms as a personal failing? first, if you are married and live a public life, where can you have sex with men? restrooms are one of the few places that are, within the parameters of the crazy culture, somewhat socially acceptable. second, if people find that setting alluring, so what? the straight dude's fear (or is it a fantasy) that if there are queers having sex he's going to be raped is absurd. what's the difference between having sex and taking a dump in a stall? they are both biological functions. i know which activity i would prefer in the next stall. and as far as hygiene goes, have you ever heard of a straight man licking the floor up after taking a dump? sen. david vitters gets an attaboy wink and slap on the back after visiting prostitutes and larry craig, who apparently doesnt pay for it, is going to get railroaded because of a cop's lies. the difference? vitters is a self-proclaimed straight and craig is a media-branded queer. this whole thing is about anti-queer bigotry. ------- ok, larry craig, you miserable sack of shit, you owe me. if you ever come to san diego, stay out of the public restrooms! queer-j brad