Banana79 Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Flashing your dick is not going to put the fear of being raped into someone's head. What, like someone waving a knife in front of your face would not make you fearful you might be stabbed? If a stranger takes out a knife then it might as well be taken for a certainty that there is intent to use it, as such an action serves no other purpose. To pull your cock out and briefly flash it isn't going to make someone think "Argh, gonna get raped". For starters, the first reaction is simply shock at seeing something you didn't expect, then the flasher has gone. I am surprised that a connection with rape is being brought up, as although I cannot know for an absolute fact I think I am making a good assumption to believe that the criminal designation of this behaviour originates from a rather antiquated perspective of seeing public displays of anything possibly related to sex being indecent. You have the most bizzare views! It's not about someone thinking they are going to get raped, it is a sexual offence and the lady involved was very upset. Would you be so blazee if it happened to your Mother/Gran etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 You have the most bizzare views! It's not about someone thinking they are going to get raped, it is a sexual offence and the lady involved was very upset. Would you be so blazee if it happened to your Mother/Gran etc? I don't think you can have read the whole thread. I was criticising the view that such behaviour has been criminalised or should be because of some link to rape. And I was querying why such behaviour is considered a sexual offence, i.e. is it criminal simply because it offends? I was also discussing why people feel a need to flash their cock and why others are upset by it. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 I was also discussing why people feel a need to flash their cock and why others are upset by it. . Should you not be more concerned about the first part of that sentence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I was also discussing why people feel a need to flash their cock and why others are upset by it. . Should you not be more concerned about the first part of that sentence? i'm guessing if it was a tart with her udders out it wouldn't be a problem?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I was also discussing why people feel a need to flash their cock and why others are upset by it. . Should you not be more concerned about the first part of that sentence? What's your point? I've already demonstrated a concern, i.e. I think that is it concerning why people feel they should do this. I am personally more interested in the effects it has on the 'viewer', i.e. why particular forms of nudity and complete nudity are seen to be indencent or offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I was also discussing why people feel a need to flash their cock and why others are upset by it. . Should you not be more concerned about the first part of that sentence? What's your point? I've already demonstrated a concern, i.e. I think that is it concerning why people feel they should do this. I am personally more interested in the effects it has on the 'viewer', i.e. why particular forms of nudity and complete nudity are seen to be indencent or offensive. To me, none. I find the sight of a penis non-offensive. But certainly breasts and vagina I would welcome more. It's the context in which they are presented. As a male, I would not find the sight of a lady flashing her labia lips at me threatening. But I can understand how a woman might find some male exposing his penis might find this pertubing. It's not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 To me, none. I find the sight of a penis non-offensive. But certainly breasts and vagina I would welcome more. It's the context in which they are presented. As a male, I would not find the sight of a lady flashing her labia lips at me threatening. But I can understand how a woman might find some male exposing his penis might find this pertubing. It's not rocket science. I don't doubt that they would be perturbed or even feel threatened. I am just questioning why but we have already touched upon the rape issue and I think this can be dismissed given that such a link is irrational. I just want to know whether the basis for such a response is based upon a unwanted confrontation with something with a sexual motivation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lao Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I don't doubt that they would be perturbed or even feel threatened. I am just questioning why but we have already touched upon the rape issue and I think this can be dismissed given that such a link is irrational. I just want to know whether the basis for such a response is based upon a unwanted confrontation with something with a sexual motivation. why would an issue be dismissed because you think it is irrational? and didnt i win this thread already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 To me, none. I find the sight of a penis non-offensive. But certainly breasts and vagina I would welcome more. It's the context in which they are presented. As a male, I would not find the sight of a lady flashing her labia lips at me threatening. But I can understand how a woman might find some male exposing his penis might find this pertubing. It's not rocket science. I don't doubt that they would be perturbed or even feel threatened. I am just questioning why but we have already touched upon the rape issue and I think this can be dismissed given that such a link is irrational. I just want to know whether the basis for such a response is based upon a unwanted confrontation with something with a sexual motivation. I really feel aggreived having to spell this out to you. A woman flashes her genitalia to me, it's not happened but if it did I could laugh it off . And I am sure that any male relative or friend of mine would do the same. (I could call the police but why?) However if some chap exposed himself to my mother, for example, in such a fashion I would want him caught. In fact I would like to catch him first myself. You may call it irrational and dismiss it, but then again you seem to live on planet Mars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 why would an issue be dismissed because you think it is irrational? and didnt i win this thread already? why would an issue be dismissed because you think it is irrational? and didnt i win this thread already? I really feel aggreived having to spell this out to you. A woman flashes her genitalia to me, it's not happened but if it did I could laugh it off .And I am sure that any male relative or friend of mine would do the same. (I could call the police but why?) However if some chap exposed himself to my mother, for example, in such a fashion I would want him caught. In fact I would like to catch him first myself. You may call it irrational and dismiss it, but then again you seem to live on planet Mars No, I am calling the link with rape irrational. Though as Lao has pointed out, it may be something that that particular person would be more inclined to do than someone who would never expose themselves. You seem very eager to re-iterate that it is indecent and wrong. I am not arguing against the fact that it is understood as such. All I am asking is whether it is that the sexual nature of this leads to how it is considered indecent or is it simply and nothing more the fact that genitalia is exposed. In other words, is the problem with nudity or nudity with a sexual motivation behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lao Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 why would an issue be dismissed because you think it is irrational? and didnt i win this thread already? why would an issue be dismissed because you think it is irrational? and didnt i win this thread already? I really feel aggreived having to spell this out to you. A woman flashes her genitalia to me, it's not happened but if it did I could laugh it off .And I am sure that any male relative or friend of mine would do the same. (I could call the police but why?) However if some chap exposed himself to my mother, for example, in such a fashion I would want him caught. In fact I would like to catch him first myself. You may call it irrational and dismiss it, but then again you seem to live on planet Mars No, I am calling the link with rape irrational. Though as Lao has pointed out, it may be something that that particular person would be more inclined to do than someone who would never expose themselves. You seem very eager to re-iterate that it is indecent and wrong. I am not arguing against the fact that it is understood as such. All I am asking is whether it is that the sexual nature of this leads to how it is considered indecent or is it simply and nothing more the fact that genitalia is exposed. In other words, is the problem with nudity or nudity with a sexual motivation behind it. put this down to one of those social norms that you dont understand because you're different. the issue boils down to decency. it is not just nudity or nudity with a sexual motivation behind it. there are decency laws regarding have concentual sex in public and swearing or being drunk in public as well as exposure. and let me cut off your kneejerk response to this by saying that we are all painfully aware that you dont agree with these decency laws, and that we should all have a much more open minded view on sexuality and decency. we get it, you are different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 Thanks Lao "Social norms" was what I was thinking of. Why can't LDV get that? And it's not a sexual preference thing. It's just having respect (which means not flashing your dick to all and sundry) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 Skirting the issue somewhat with the usual 'You're not going to understand this'. You assume that I don't understand that these social norms exist. And that I don't understand what decency is. I am not asking for anyone to affirm that such acts are simply indecent and that there are social norms. I am rather trying to discuss how such a social norm has been developed. How much of it comprises of sexual repression in respect of simply dislike of nudity. I think I would be a very socially 'unhinged' person if I didn't realise that social norms existed and had no idea whatsoever as to their basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I am rather trying to discuss how such a social norm has been developed. How much of it comprises of sexual repression in respect of simply dislike of nudity. This social norm has not "developed". It's innate. None of it comprises of sexual repression or dislike of nudity. An old lady out on a coastal walk is not at fault if she finds a chap walking towards her suddenly whipping out his todger a bit dtsconcerting. What part of that do you not understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I am rather trying to discuss how such a social norm has been developed. How much of it comprises of sexual repression in respect of simply dislike of nudity. This social norm has not "developed". It's innate. None of it comprises of sexual repression or dislike of nudity. An old lady out on a coastal walk is not at fault if she finds a chap walking towards her suddenly whipping out his todger a bit dtsconcerting. What part of that do you not understand? Innate? Really?! I would disagree with that completely. What part of my comments do you not understand when I say that I know that many or most will find it disconcerting or perturbing. If it is not about dislike of nudity or sexual repression, what do you personally think it is about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.