No it`s not a contraction in terms. Anyone can accuse someone of being camp. I worked with a gay guy last night and he said he couldn`t stand gay men camping it up. Extreme campness could be construed by anyone as unprofessional regardless of their sexuality.
It is a discipline issue based on the way an officer is perceived to behave inappropriately, and he has been disciplined by his senior officer.
The fact that both are gay is an irrelavence - except for the Sun, which can wring fourth -form sniggering out of a phone book if they can get a headline.
Surely "mincing" is an overt way of displaying one's gayness ?
If a particularly "red blooded" guy walked around the office, showing off his heterosexuality by thrusting his crutch and flexing his biceps, then presumably he would have been similarly asked to change his behaviour.
joggerjayne - your point infers that all men who mince are gay, and all men who are gay, mince.
This of course is patently not true - but your point about a similar reaction if overt heterosexual behaviour was observed is a valid one.
As I have said, this issue is not about sexuality, or any perceived inention to underline or advertise it - it's about inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, and it has been addressed on that basis.