North Dakota legislator who voted against gay rights exposed as Grindr user

A Republican North Dakota legislator from Fargo, who voted against an anti-discrimination law that would have expanded gay rights in the state, has been outed as gay after it was revealed that he used Grindr. Not only had he used the social network for gay men, but he also sent another user a graphic photo.

Earlier this month, Dustin Smith, 21, of Bismarck, contacted The Forum. Smith, who has no known connections with politicians, said that when he saw the newspaper’s headline about the bill not getting passed on April 2, he recognized one of the politicians - Rep. Randy Boehning, 52. Smith had been chatting with Boehning, who used the name Top Man!.

In March, Boehning began sending Smith sexually explicit messages. On March 12, he sent Smith an unsolicited picture of his penis.

“I just felt like this story had to get out,” Smith told the Washington Post. “A [representative] had voted against a bill for the LGBT community and here he was talking to me on Grindr.”

Boehning initially refused to admit that he was Top Man!, but he later came forward on Saturday and admitted that he is gay. However, he didn’t think there was an issue with his explicit photo, since Grindr is an adult site.

“That's what gay guys do on gay sites, don't they?” Boehning told The Forum. “That's how things happen on Grindr. It's a gay chat site. It's not the first thing you do on that site. That's what we do, exchange pics on the site.”

While Boehning told The Forum that a weight had been lifted off his shoulders, he insists that something nefarious is behind him being publicly outed. He said that another state representative threatened to blackmail him if he voted against the anti-discrimination bill, which he did anyway. He also believes that Smith came forward as revenge for his vote.

Boehning has voted against anti-discrimination bills in the past and said that he has done so because he doesn’t think his constituents would support it. He also thinks that the bill was too vague, as it would protect people who are “perceived” to be gay, The Forum noted.