watch wang's gone wild at home , no one is allowed to watch porn in a bar. do you think because you are a gay bar your are special? if you wanna be equal , be equal in penalty , as well as benefit. deal with it.

Eric you're missing many points:
1. there ARE both straight AND gay bars in Seattle that have porn INSTALLED into their buildings
2. The Eagle is definitely getting singled out and the laws are not being applied equally, irregardless of sexual identity.
3. The WSLCB are saying one thing and then acting a completely different way
4. this action by WSLCB not only disrupts but also threatens The Eagle's business, based on archaic laws.
5. Many other States do not enforce such archaic laws so ruthlessly.

Could Seattle use a 501c3 "Nightlife Legal Defense Fund" to protect from stupid enforcement that doesn't do anything other than waste taxpayers money?

please find add'l ideas on this topic via Working Media here:

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=13…

You can watch wangs gone wild all you want at home while also contemplating how 'just deal with it and don't try to change anything' is a great way to live, I think there's a lot of activists in the past few decades that never heard that, shame.

While you do that I'll go purposely watch all my wangs in the eagle and work on loosening the umbilical cord strings around here.

Any bar that restricts patrons under 21, and has no windows onto the street (the Cuff, for instance) should be able to show hardcore porn of whatever persuasion. Let the market decide whether that bar has a taste for it or not, and if you walk into that establishment and are offended, it is your right to walk out again,

While we're at it, let the strippers and the booze mix. It's ridiculous that you can't have a drink and watch a stripper.

Catalina for the free market? Will wonders never cease? Awesome!

This case is ridiculous on so many levels. If you think adult gay men consenting to watch a gay porn film is a threat to public safety, you have serious issues. If you just think the Eagle should "follow the law," well, the law is horribly vague. And if you think we are needlessly advocating on behalf of gay bars, just look at the evidence.

All of these vice laws are absurd. Let bar owners police their private property as they see fit. Whatever you think, using government's force to take action against peaceful "criminals" is wrong.

Intern dear, you are young. So young that when I first started commenting on this horrid thing we call The Slog, you were probably still being dis-matriculated in whatever grim home school or Christianist compound you seem to have emerged from,

So I am willing to "cut you some slack" , as the kids say, in your surprise that I would embrace the free market. But embrace I do, when the market is the best vessel. You see, I realize that different things need different vessels. To take it to your level, you certainly wouldn't want to keep your Four Loko in the same jar as you do your Axe Body Spray, would you?

Nuance, you really should try it sometime. Perhaps when you're older.......

The Liquor Board might as well select submissions for HUMP (2 out of 20 films this year were man-on-man)

@3 There is no such word as 'irregardless'!!!

@9 How bout you nitpick 3's word choice instead of actually addressing their ideas? That'll show em!

Catalina, how I love you.

Discretion is great. It allows people to make the right decisions based on circumstance. If there has only been one lewd conduct violation in a year, this most certainly means most agents look the other way at the minor offenses they COULD be citing for. That's good.

If only more civil bureaucracies allowed employees to make appropriate decisions instead of hiring gum-smacking dropouts who can't find the proper citation in their thousand page rule book just to tell you NO.

Unfortunately it also allows a probably bigoted agent to act on the bigotry under cover of "doing the job" - probably what happened here.

Best to do get the WAC laws about liquor re-written entirely anyway.

Catalina, I want your babies.

So what's the big deal? No porn on the walls....Just go to the patio and watch the groups of guys there masterbate each other. That place is skanky.....Signed a Gay male.

@15

This is an obvious case of someone forcing ideals down the gay communities throat. Either they have a beef with the Eagle specifically or they chose it as an easy target.
The other issue that many don't understand is that this is a start, they will grow this culture of policing until adult establishments resemble schools.

We are all free thinking individuals and we should have the option of whatever we like in a bar or tit show.

You might not care about the issue until they start policing your favorite bar.

A gay man......

It appears that the WSLCB and the city of Seattle officers have nothing better to do than to target gay bars as mentioned by one of the viewers.

As much crime as there is in this city, I truly dont see the reason why they make or have the time to do such.

Rather then it only be reasons of bigatry, I can't think of any other. There is just too much of more serious real crimes that dwell within and around the city. (Pioneer Square)

Crack/Herione right in front of the bar" The Double Header" on 2nd and Yesler.

According to the bartender there, Police officers dont even monitor that particular area as well as other areas of Seattle.

Any and everyone who is not gay,however aware of gay bars are already familiar of what goes on in certain ones.

If for some reason, a straight/gay person walks in a bar that they are unfamiliar or uncomfortable in, like the one viewer replied, can walk out just as easily as they came in.

It's just that simple. Gay mgrs and people should not have to convert to the straight life's attitude, just because they are not comfortable with the activity that takes place in their space and enviromnent.

Because of the gay bar, such as the "Eagle" is merely targeted, the business has gone down and at some point will soon close down because of the harrassment from the WSLCB and WSP.

It's all about respect. Gays are aware of what goes on in straght bars and if they want to support them,are not looking to seek out something offensive, when they already know what time it is before they make the efforts to go.

Straights are aware of this and I truly believe have it down packed before making any decidions to go into our gay bars. It's the law makers who have the issue!

Let it go, and let people live and enjoy their lives in the world that we all live in and help pay state taxes to do such...

@18

I jumped and read your screen name 'Seattle Has Shitty Fag Bars'. that blew your argument before i even dissected the self hate.

If you hate the gay bars in Seattle then open your own. This is an obvious case of a targeted business.

StoneWALL StoneWALL StoneWALL! :-)

"But the Eagle will receive a more severe penalty because it showed a video that allegedly included 'a lubricated erect penis,' says Susan Blaker, who is in charge of liquor enforcement in King County."

Ugh, this is that same institutionalized bias that permeates other areas like film ratings and television censorship. Normative male-identified sexuality (and the complementary lack of female sexual agency) means women are constructed as sexual objects while men are sexual agents. So naked women might not be "porn" because there's no implicit "threat" of them exercising sexual agency (since their sexualities only exist in relation to a man's and his desire), while naked (and especially erect) penises ALWAYS imply the "threat" of sex. Of course, all of this is patently unconstitutional anyway: that First Amendment was designed specifically to protect broadly-defined "speech" that most people DO find highly objectionable (it's not necessary to protect the freedom of speech people DON'T find objectionable, after all), like pornography, despite some historic Supreme Court decisions.

"When asked if this meant state money was being used to pay a man to watch gay erotica, Blaker said, 'No, he was providing technical assistance.'"

Um, but isn't that actually "Yes" when the provision of the technical assistance involves watching gay erotica in order to evaluate it? Awesome!

Clubs in republican Florida have more freedom than here... Nightlife is a cruel joke in this town. Can't smoke, can't drink late, can't drink and see nudity... really?! but somehow it's ok to bicycle next to dump trucks, have crazy people yelling profanities on buses and bus stops, etc... what a stupid place where ppl work too hard and get too little...

So I was in The Eagle last night and guess what?
The Seattle Fire Dept decides to wave through like they own the place
...this complete bullshit

For normal men, the prospect of screening gay porn, requested by the bar owner or not, is repugnant in the extreme.

I pity this hardworking official for his distasteful task.

And I'm glad that at least in one area of public behavior basic standards of appropriate speech and conduct are being enforced.

Actually, "Seattleblues" for NORMAL men, homophobia is repugnant in the extreme.

as are you.

Do you have some issues you're wrestling with, perhaps?(including some that might have you thinking about "wrestling" in ways that make you both uncomfortable and aroused?)

If 3% of the population choose to hop everywhere rather than walk, you would have no hesitation in calling this abnormal.

If 3% of the population decided to dress their children in untanned fur and send them to school, you would have no compunction in calling this abnormal.

When 3% of the population expresses a deviant sexuality at odds with every biological function and imperative, somehow you define this as normal, to be celebrated.

Homosexuality is a mental illness. It isn't harmful to anyone other than the person who suffers from it. It shouldn't be the subject of law, or the reason for discrimination. It shouldn't ipso facto dictate involuntary treatment. It is not a sign of evil or immorality, anymore than any other mental illness. Persons who suffer from it are more to be pitied than censured. But it is an illness.

@ Seattleblues

Wow!! Your goddamn insane.

Decent article but Mr. Luby should have dug a little deeper.

never seen hardcore porn in a straight bar ever sorry. you go seattleblues , even though the stranger will ban you because you said anything anti gay , they are like that . freedom of speech only if you are gblt or what ever it is , everyone else is burnt . the only rag worse in seattle is the seattle weekly they've gone so far off the deep end it's un recognizable now a day's .

@ Eric Cartman AKA NWSL

I'm sorry they banned your other profile but you were damn annoying.

Seattleblues, it isn't 3%, it's at least 10%. Or, the same percentage of people who are left-handed, the same percentage of people who don't learn from the way schools teach, the same percentage of people who have a reaction to a given drug that is exactly the opposite of what was expected (get hyper from a downer, for example), the same percentage of people who have a larger left foot than right ("normally" it's the other way around), and so on, and so on.

When ten percent of a population is identifiably and similarly distinct from the rest of the population it is, by definition, NORMAL. That's how we all end up unique: my cluster of differences is different from yours.

Personally, I'm just glad my cluster doesn't include an inability to learn from evidence.

Homosexuality is not harmful to the person who "suffers" from it - homophobia is, to both the homophobics and the people they direct their homophobia at (who aren't even necessarily gay). So _homophobia_ is a disease (and a potentially lethal one); homosexuality is not.