The Fruit Machine

[cybercoma]

I just found out about this dark part of our history.

The Fruit Machine was a device that measured pupillary response to homosexual pornography in order to identify gay people. This was used to expel people from the public service, military, and RCMP throughout the 50s and 60s. Although they stopped in the late 60s, the RCMP still kept files on over 9000 "suspected homosexuals."

All of this based on faulty assumptions that try to apply science to morality.

This also highlights how state surveillance is not just a contemporary issue, but something that has been abused throughout our history.

[Big Guy]

This is an interesting "science" measuring an individuals response to different stimuli. This application against gays is obviously faulty but the science may be useful. There are a number of jobs where one signs an agreement to take "lie detector" tests as part of the employment conditions. Since this test has not been proven to be accurate, I do wonder why this condition exists.

I have been involved in discussions where the use of this "science" to screen potential problems with people applying to deal with children. Basically, they measure sexual excitement triggered by pictures and videos of child porn. The proponents claim that these tests with pedophile related stimuli are accurate and should be a condition of pre-screening for these jobs. Others argue the invasion of privacy overrides the "protection" issue.

Personally, I have still not made up my mind where I stand on the issue. That always seems to be the question when one has to choose between safety and privacy.

[bush_cheney2004]

More out of context judgement...the "state" had an interest in screening homosexual behavior because society's (general population) not only passed judgement, but actively discriminated against such individuals, sometimes violently. The quite popular "morals" of the day presented a safety and security risk for many government positions. Accordingly, homosexual behaviour was deemed to be incompatible with such service(s).

[cybercoma]

Go ahead and explain why it was a security risk even in the context of the time.

[Big Guy]

My recollection of the argument against gays in the government, police etc in those early days was the possibility of being susceptible to be blackmailed for this "immoral" lifestyle. Since the attitude towards homosexuality has greatly changed is can no longer be something one wants to hide then that rather flimsy excuse certainly can no longer be considered.

[guyser]

Go ahead and explain why it was a security risk even in the context of the time.

It wasnt, they just thought so.

Why else would J Edgar hide it so much?

[Peter F]

Go ahead and explain why it was a security risk even in the context of the time.

Since many homosexuals had to hide their homosexuality in order to climb the civil service ladder It was a security risk because one could be blackmailed through the threat of outing the homosexual.

That was the theory but I have no knowledge of a homosexual with access to sensitive material ever actually being blackmailed.

[On Guard for Thee]

Since many homosexuals had to hide their homosexuality in order to climb the civil service ladder It was a security risk because one could be blackmailed through the threat of outing the homosexual.

That was the theory but I have no knowledge of a homosexual with access to sensitive material ever actually being blackmailed.

No maybe not, but it provided a damn handy excuse for gay bashing.

[Peter F]

It most certainly did. Thankfully those days are fading.