Is PDA {Public Displays of Affection} ever OK?
In an apparent total lack of understanding of what happens when people go to shopping malls, a California security guard this weekend kicked out a young couple for holding hands and kissing at the Westfield Galleria. I ask you, America, if the day is at hand when we cant walk around kissing our boyfriends at the mall, are they going to clamp down on getting our ears pierced and buying a Cinnabon there, too?
The ejection doesnt seem to have been entirely motivated by their public display of affection. It is worth noting that the smoochy couple singled out by security happens to be gay. Daniel Chesmore, 21, told the local Sacramento Fox affiliate this week, I kissed him on the cheek. Thats how my boyfriend and I show affection. And, he said, This is exactly what we did at the mall on Saturday. Chesmore adds that when he and his boyfriend, Jose Guzman, were confronted by a security guard, the man told them, If you continue to kiss, you will be asked to leave the mall. Period I counted you guys kissing 25 times. The couple also produced an audio of the guard telling them, I told you before, we contact any couple about this behavior.... - http://www.salon.com/2013/03/05/is_pda_ever_okay/
I'm of the thought that this wouldn't have been a problem had it been two females kissing in public as I've been there and done that. Had me and my friend been dressed more masculine and had a few more pounds between us, that too, would have changed.
Oh, the horror of two guys kissing. I saw a post here from a guy claiming to have no problems with gays, as long as they keep such actions to themselves. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
Of course the mall in question displays the classic hypocrisy which was prevalent in the Jim Crow days and such an activity so disgusted the security guard, he watched and counted them kiss 25 times and after allowing his erection to settle down, then warned the two guys.
While I wouldn't make a big deal about it, I'm hoping that the men involved do.
Just another thing that people do when they do not want to acknowledge something they see as wrong.
But, if it was on privately owned property, I don't see as they have much recourse, unless they want to hold a gay-couples sit in flash mob type event at the mall. They could then be arrested, and as a symbolic act that is fine, I am not sure how much publicity they would receive, but what the heck. I t might throw things a bit more into the light.
I am unclear Dylan. The LBGT community isn't asking forevangelicals to change their beliefs. They are asking that the secular world change their beliefs. This isn't unique to the LGBT community. There are Muslim woman in the Arab world who don't want to wear head coverings or berquas and go to school and drive. Also forbidden by certain factions of their faith. There are woman in Israel who want to pray at the Wailing Wall, in prayer shawls which is forbidden by the Orthodox Jewish community, and they are arrested. Now one can say, the difference between the Arab world and Israel is that those countries have national religions. But we are asecularstate. We don't have a national religion. And so this issue is secular by nature.
Personally, I find it kind of grotty when I see someonepiercedto the x degree, but I understand that they have the right to. So as long as they are not trying to kiss in church, I don't see your point.
Our civil rights aresecular.CHICK FIL A owners have their faith, which they decided to make public. They run a public business. It is up to the public to choose to eat there or not. We are allowed to protest under our civil rights, so long as the don't constitute a threat.
The key part of your argument is this:"...they in turnDEMANDthat the general public be forced to witness and accept them doingwhat some people in the general public find offensive."
You don't have to accept it. You don't have to condone it. Some may think it offensive. But you do have to tolerate it unless and until it is made illegal. The owners of the mall should set the rules of conduct, and if they say that two guys kissing is beyond their standards of decency, well, that is for them to decide.
IMO, of course.
Maybe not?
Well said Brolly
First off, being gay is an orientation, not a lifestyle, but aside from that, the PDA is NOT a religious act nor is it in anyway, classified as a civil right. Moreover, as the article points out, such conduct is acceptable from heterosexual couples but not homosexual couples. We are talking social taboo's here and such things by their very nature are subject to a persons prejudice and bias.
As the article also pointed out, the mall had no rules on PDA, what the security guard did was highly, if not overtly, suspect. May I point out that in the past, blacks, by way of social taboo, also were not allowed to show PDA.
There is a flaw in that logic. There are many who see women who wear hijabs as being offensive. Can a mall now set the standards for dress in publicly accessed areas based on subjective criteria such as dress?
True, all things being equal but in the case of a hijab, which is not a bikini, that would not wash. The same applied to PDA.
Sure. It is private property. They can tell all men wearing skirts that admission to their property is forbidden them.
Might not be good for business though.
The thing with any PDA, regardless as to who does it, society rather frowns upon it.
Kissing during the movie Titanic is OK. As for Schindler's List? Not so much.
Good find.
The only duty the mall has is to it's necrotic shareholders. It has to make them money or they will flee.
Yup.....
Had to google "snoods".
This sentence appears in the above article, Perrie: "I saw a post here from a guy claiming to have no problems with gays, as long as they keep such actions to themselves. With friends like that, who needs enemies?"
Now...replace the word "gays" with the word "religious", and I think I get where Dylan is coming from. Because quite honestly, many in the LBGT community do indeed say: "I don't have any problem with the religious. As long as they keep it to themselves".
As far as the article goes, What is the mall's policy on PDA? The article doesn't say. And without that, there is really no way to address the specific story. SoI guess I can only address the title of the article as a whole.
IsPDA ever OK? "Yes".
Actually, they run a private enterprise. Just like the mall is a private enterprise. A public business would be one owned by the government. Your local library for instance.
And private enterprise has the rights to implement faith based policies. It's that silly 1st Amendment thing.
I was thinking the same thing. It appears that the mall is remiss in that they are letting a security guard set the behavioral standards expected in the mall - which means he gets to set the rules and enforce them, too. That makes absolutely no sense to me.
I wonder if he hangs out in the Men's Room and makes sure the guys wash after having a pee?
Are PDA ever okay? - NO!! Keep yourtongueinside your mouth when out in public. It's just good manners.
Before I begin, allow me to say that I am a supporter of equal rights for all sans any exceptions.
In this particular case one must define the kiss, peck on the cheek, lip to lip or tongue down throat. Only from my own perspective, it would not matter the genders involved but I have no need to bear witness to over the top displays in public. There is a time and place for everything and a public and private life.
OK, Aeon Pax, you brought it up. So just how far do you think a same sex pair should go in public displays of affection. Peck on the cheek and holding hands? Tongue and slobbers? Hand sliding up under a skirt? Boob fondling? Crotch grabbing? A nice hot dry fuck with clothes on? You tell us what you think - you asked us what we think, now it's your turn.
Well, now you have me all turned on, Grump.
There's nothing better than a little tongue and slobbers with the one you love.
Have you been practicing? I told you how to practice, remember?
There is a time and place. Kissing 25 times (okay -- who has the time to actually count how many times someone kisses as they walk thru the mall, geesh!) seems a little overly affectionate for just a trip to the mall. Of course, I'm 48 and not in a relationship right now. So perhaps I'm just jealous.
Running back to find the post where Grump told me how to practice tongue and slobbers.
Shoot -- I didn't know there was going to be a pop quiz. I need to study harder. I need a study buddy!
Yuck face.
Check your article about cockroaches, GeeGee.
How did I miss that??? I'd have one hell of a hickey around my mouth if I practiced on a shop vac!!!
Do you watch the Big Bang, Grump? There was an episode with a kissing machine - set up so that you could kiss whoever you were talking to over the internet. I bet I could find some serious study buddies if there were such a thing. Here's the link:
That was a bit of really good television. I have never watched that show, not much of a tv guy here. Maybe I should, though. Thanks for that little bit of really funny fun.
The Big Bang is my guilty pleasure. I turn on the re-runs after dinner while I walk on my treadmill. I laugh so hard that I forget I'm exercising. It makes an hour go very quickly.
I'm guilty of grabbin on the hubby behind a lot... but I keep most affectionate acts to a minimum or on the way down low...
I think that if heterosexuals are being ousted for the same standard... it's all good. If the mall cop is oogling until he finds a couple young men and pulls out the yuck face, that's discrimination.
Either let them all kiss until they're blue, or none... and if it makes you miss out on some "hot lesbian tongue action"... that's what it means.
Just another thing that people do when they do not want to acknowledge something they see as wrong.
But, if it was on privately owned property, I don't see as they have much recourse, unless they want to hold a gay-couples sit in flash mob type event at the mall. They could then be arrested, and as a symbolic act that is fine, I am not sure how much publicity they would receive, but what the heck. I t might throw things a bit more into the light.
I am unclear Dylan. The LBGT community isn't asking forevangelicals to change their beliefs. They are asking that the secular world change their beliefs. This isn't unique to the LGBT community. There are Muslim woman in the Arab world who don't want to wear head coverings or berquas and go to school and drive. Also forbidden by certain factions of their faith. There are woman in Israel who want to pray at the Wailing Wall, in prayer shawls which is forbidden by the Orthodox Jewish community, and they are arrested. Now one can say, the difference between the Arab world and Israel is that those countries have national religions. But we are asecularstate. We don't have a national religion. And so this issue is secular by nature.
Personally, I find it kind of grotty when I see someonepiercedto the x degree, but I understand that they have the right to. So as long as they are not trying to kiss in church, I don't see your point.
Our civil rights aresecular.CHICK FIL A owners have their faith, which they decided to make public. They run a public business. It is up to the public to choose to eat there or not. We are allowed to protest under our civil rights, so long as the don't constitute a threat.
The key part of your argument is this:"...they in turnDEMANDthat the general public be forced to witness and accept them doingwhat some people in the general public find offensive."
You don't have to accept it. You don't have to condone it. Some may think it offensive. But you do have to tolerate it unless and until it is made illegal. The owners of the mall should set the rules of conduct, and if they say that two guys kissing is beyond their standards of decency, well, that is for them to decide.
IMO, of course.
Maybe not?
Well said Brolly
First off, being gay is an orientation, not a lifestyle, but aside from that, the PDA is NOT a religious act nor is it in anyway, classified as a civil right. Moreover, as the article points out, such conduct is acceptable from heterosexual couples but not homosexual couples. We are talking social taboo's here and such things by their very nature are subject to a persons prejudice and bias.
As the article also pointed out, the mall had no rules on PDA, what the security guard did was highly, if not overtly, suspect. May I point out that in the past, blacks, by way of social taboo, also were not allowed to show PDA.
There is a flaw in that logic. There are many who see women who wear hijabs as being offensive. Can a mall now set the standards for dress in publicly accessed areas based on subjective criteria such as dress?
True, all things being equal but in the case of a hijab, which is not a bikini, that would not wash. The same applied to PDA.
Sure. It is private property. They can tell all men wearing skirts that admission to their property is forbidden them.
Might not be good for business though.
The thing with any PDA, regardless as to who does it, society rather frowns upon it.
Kissing during the movie Titanic is OK. As for Schindler's List? Not so much.
Good find.
The only duty the mall has is to it's necrotic shareholders. It has to make them money or they will flee.
Yup.....
Had to google "snoods".
This sentence appears in the above article, Perrie: "I saw a post here from a guy claiming to have no problems with gays, as long as they keep such actions to themselves. With friends like that, who needs enemies?"
Now...replace the word "gays" with the word "religious", and I think I get where Dylan is coming from. Because quite honestly, many in the LBGT community do indeed say: "I don't have any problem with the religious. As long as they keep it to themselves".
As far as the article goes, What is the mall's policy on PDA? The article doesn't say. And without that, there is really no way to address the specific story. SoI guess I can only address the title of the article as a whole.
IsPDA ever OK? "Yes".
Actually, they run a private enterprise. Just like the mall is a private enterprise. A public business would be one owned by the government. Your local library for instance.
And private enterprise has the rights to implement faith based policies. It's that silly 1st Amendment thing.
I was thinking the same thing. It appears that the mall is remiss in that they are letting a security guard set the behavioral standards expected in the mall - which means he gets to set the rules and enforce them, too. That makes absolutely no sense to me.
I wonder if he hangs out in the Men's Room and makes sure the guys wash after having a pee?
Are PDA ever okay? - NO!! Keep yourtongueinside your mouth when out in public. It's just good manners.
Before I begin, allow me to say that I am a supporter of equal rights for all sans any exceptions.
In this particular case one must define the kiss, peck on the cheek, lip to lip or tongue down throat. Only from my own perspective, it would not matter the genders involved but I have no need to bear witness to over the top displays in public. There is a time and place for everything and a public and private life.
OK, Aeon Pax, you brought it up. So just how far do you think a same sex pair should go in public displays of affection. Peck on the cheek and holding hands? Tongue and slobbers? Hand sliding up under a skirt? Boob fondling? Crotch grabbing? A nice hot dry fuck with clothes on? You tell us what you think - you asked us what we think, now it's your turn.
Well, now you have me all turned on, Grump.
There's nothing better than a little tongue and slobbers with the one you love.
Have you been practicing? I told you how to practice, remember?
There is a time and place. Kissing 25 times (okay -- who has the time to actually count how many times someone kisses as they walk thru the mall, geesh!) seems a little overly affectionate for just a trip to the mall. Of course, I'm 48 and not in a relationship right now. So perhaps I'm just jealous.
Running back to find the post where Grump told me how to practice tongue and slobbers.
Shoot -- I didn't know there was going to be a pop quiz. I need to study harder. I need a study buddy!
Yuck face.
Check your article about cockroaches, GeeGee.
How did I miss that??? I'd have one hell of a hickey around my mouth if I practiced on a shop vac!!!
Do you watch the Big Bang, Grump? There was an episode with a kissing machine - set up so that you could kiss whoever you were talking to over the internet. I bet I could find some serious study buddies if there were such a thing. Here's the link:
That was a bit of really good television. I have never watched that show, not much of a tv guy here. Maybe I should, though. Thanks for that little bit of really funny fun.
The Big Bang is my guilty pleasure. I turn on the re-runs after dinner while I walk on my treadmill. I laugh so hard that I forget I'm exercising. It makes an hour go very quickly.
I'm guilty of grabbin on the hubby behind a lot... but I keep most affectionate acts to a minimum or on the way down low...
I think that if heterosexuals are being ousted for the same standard... it's all good. If the mall cop is oogling until he finds a couple young men and pulls out the yuck face, that's discrimination.
Either let them all kiss until they're blue, or none... and if it makes you miss out on some "hot lesbian tongue action"... that's what it means.