(This column was published in the North Shore News on Nov. 28, 2001)


The 'Fruit Loop' can be a dangerous place

By Leo Knight

The brutal murder of Aaron Webster last week in Stanley Park has evoked a great deal of hyperbole and rhetoric.


Webster was by all accounts a nice man and a good photographer. He was also gay. Certainly no reason to suffer and die in the manner he did. Was the fact he was engaging in public sex acts in the park a reason to be killed? No, certainly not.


Was it a contributing factor? In all probability, yes. Whether this was a hate crime or the ramification of a jealous lover stumbling onto a sight, which toppled him over the edge, has yet to be determined by the investigating detectives.


The problem I have with the resulting media attention and community reaction is the speed in which everyone seems to have jumped to the conclusion that Webster's murder is the result of a hate crime to the exclusion of all else. I'm not sure that fanning the flames of hatred and panic in a community is a correct and responsible reaction.


The morning after the homicide was discovered, the operator of a high-profile gay book store in the West End was quoted in the media, rather extensively I might add, saying that all homosexual men should be very afraid now.


Of what, I'm not entirely sure. Of a cold-blooded, thick-as-a-brick redneck who swings a mighty bat? Well possibly, if all Vancouver-area gay men engage in public sex acts in a certain area of Stanley Park colloquially and locally known as "The Fruit Loop."


The practical reality is that the average gay man in the West End of Vancouver has much more to fear from a jilted lover than a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal. Now, I'm not for a moment suggesting the murder of Aaron Webster was at the hands of someone known to him. In fact, what I am suggesting is that we, as a community, should not be leaping to conclusions on any side of the question.


You see, the gay community activists have so managed to control debate that the reality of their promiscuous lifestyle is totally ignored as they pressure for all the rights of marriage afforded to heterosexual couples. And, I might add, a whole host of other demanded rights from governments across this nation who are so afraid to say no to this small but incredibly influential special interest group.


Indeed, in much the same manner as Elinor Caplan screams "racist" at anyone who dares disagree with her government's insane refugee policies, the gay lobby screams "homophobe" at anyone who suggests their arguments don't hold water.


Well, I will publicly state I am neither a racist nor a homophobe. But I think that Canada's refugee policy in allowing undocumented "refugee claimants" freedom when they have just disembarked an airplane is plain, simple and unadulterated stupidity and gross malfeasance on the part of the minister.


Equally, catering in the manner we do to the homosexual lobby is also stupid. For the gay community to suggest their lifestyle is, in any manner, equivalent to a typical heterosexual relationship is utter nonsense.


Yes, some, and I stress only some, of the gay community function in monogamous relationships, but these couples are in the minority.


The reality is that the average gay male is exceptionally promiscuous. Even those who consider themselves in a relationship. This is a reality conveniently left out of the "gay rights" debate.


I remember a study which determined a promiscuous heterosexual male might have something in the neighbourhood of 50 different sexual contacts in a year.


In the homosexual community that number rose to a thousand. That is a little over three a day. Whew! I'm tired already.


Which perhaps may explain how Aaron Webster came to be wandering around Stanley Park dressed in his socks and met a rather untimely demise. It is perhaps a good working hypothesis for the police that the killer may have gone down there looking for a gay male engaged in public, anonymous sexual encounters or may have been the recipient of some unwanted attention.


But, the bottom line is that Aaron Webster would still be alive were he simply a gay male who engaged in whatever type of sex he desired in the privacy of his own home. And no amount of rhetoric and hyperbole will change that.





Primetimecrime current headlines               Columns 2001