FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Cyber flasher jailed

Cyber flasher jailed

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

I'm so pleased people are reporting them I so more and more being reported daily and it gives me a little confidence that hopefully this won't be a thing going forward, I've always dreaded the day my little girl wants social media because of scum like this.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sWyldWoman 36 weeks ago

Edinburgh

I really hope this case is talked about a lot and people realise this behavior is not ok.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rcoupleCouple 36 weeks ago

Mid Glam

"I really hope this case is talked about a lot and people realise this behavior is not ok.

^^^^^ like a million percent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS 36 weeks ago

Central

It's good that this first case has resulted in a clear outcome, as a potential deterrent. It will get more coverage, than a lighter sentence.

It would be helpful if it becomes as socially unacceptable as drink driving

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tlanshiaWoman 36 weeks ago

Chatham

"I really hope this case is talked about a lot and people realise this behavior is not ok.

I hope so too but sadly, it won't deter some people.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eyond PurityCouple 36 weeks ago

Lincolnshire

It’s fantastic to see - my son is going to go on social media soon no doubt and I want him to know what’s right from wrong.

I do wonder how things should be on here like the story earlier of someone tributing a pic of a woman and sending her it, unsolicited. But I guess they’ll say on here that people have chosen to put pics up

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *omKsubSMan 36 weeks ago

Newton

No entry on the sex offenders register for exposing himself to a minor?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in practice

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sWyldWoman 36 weeks ago

Edinburgh

Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icolerobbieCouple 36 weeks ago

walsall

And rightly so. Good to see a real deterrent to this behaviour. Who on earth would flash a teenager on social media.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit. "

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

I don't know how the police or courts would draw that sort of line - and I don't know if I think they'd do a good job - but in an ideal world it'd be what I do. Some sites are adult sites and you're gonna see some shit. Some sites (like Xitter or Reddit) maybe you could opt in to it being adult for you. Ones where you're networking for work, sharing tips on getting Junior to do his maths homework, or chatting with Grandma, this law would apply fully.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icolerobbieCouple 36 weeks ago

walsall

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

Isn’t there an adult content disclaimer when you first visit the site? If there isn’t there should be surely?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *weet and SpiceCouple 36 weeks ago

Around the Midlands

"It's good that this first case has resulted in a clear outcome, as a potential deterrent. It will get more coverage, than a lighter sentence "

His sentence doesn't seem to be for the purposes of deterring, but rather he was already on the sex offenders register for sexual activity with a child under 16 and exposure last year for which he received a community order.

So he breached that order as well as a suspended sentence for another sexual offence.

Hopefully it will have an impact though

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

Isn’t there an adult content disclaimer when you first visit the site? If there isn’t there should be surely?"

Don't know.

I'm talking about how a law might apply differently to different social media sites.

If a person sends me their genitalia on LinkedIn or Facebook or Mumsnet - law applies.

If a person sends me their genitalia on X or Reddit - it depends on how I use the site, and possibly I could opt in to see adult content.

If a person sends me their genitalia on a site like this - the law should apply less or not at all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

What a great outcome!

It did make me wonder about the unsolicited tribute and where it would stand…

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icolerobbieCouple 36 weeks ago

walsall

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

Isn’t there an adult content disclaimer when you first visit the site? If there isn’t there should be surely?

Don't know.

I'm talking about how a law might apply differently to different social media sites.

If a person sends me their genitalia on LinkedIn or Facebook or Mumsnet - law applies.

If a person sends me their genitalia on X or Reddit - it depends on how I use the site, and possibly I could opt in to see adult content.

If a person sends me their genitalia on a site like this - the law should apply less or not at all."

I agree, I don’t use twitter or x though, I didn’t realise that there was adult content too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"What a great outcome!

It did make me wonder about the unsolicited tribute and where it would stand…

In my opinion, it's in a similar category. But that's my opinion.

I think sending unsolicited, direct messages to anyone with your genitals and/or explicit sex acts is abhorrent.

Having pictures on a profile that someone has to actively seek out and click on is a different thing (though many conflate the two).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

Isn’t there an adult content disclaimer when you first visit the site? If there isn’t there should be surely?

Don't know.

I'm talking about how a law might apply differently to different social media sites.

If a person sends me their genitalia on LinkedIn or Facebook or Mumsnet - law applies.

If a person sends me their genitalia on X or Reddit - it depends on how I use the site, and possibly I could opt in to see adult content.

If a person sends me their genitalia on a site like this - the law should apply less or not at all.

I agree, I don’t use twitter or x though, I didn’t realise that there was adult content too.

There is. I'm a casual user of Reddit and there are some very niche adult sites there. I suppose in my head I'm going "if you're on Reddit for r/chocolatechipcookies or r/mycomputerisbroken (I don't know if those exist, I'm making that up), you'll probably want a different experience to r/anal or r/footfetish.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittleMissCali_MrDJCouple 36 weeks ago

wonderland.

"What a great outcome!

It did make me wonder about the unsolicited tribute and where it would stand…

"
I was thinking that too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

Obviously good that pervy creeps are being dealt with but poses some questions as to where the lines are on sites like this.

I'll just switch out that naked profile photo...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"What a great outcome!

It did make me wonder about the unsolicited tribute and where it would stand…

In my opinion, it's in a similar category. But that's my opinion.

I think sending unsolicited, direct messages to anyone with your genitals and/or explicit sex acts is abhorrent.

Having pictures on a profile that someone has to actively seek out and click on is a different thing (though many conflate the two). "

I suspect it'll be an edge case and it'll take some time to work out those specifics. I'd really like an opt in/ opt out option, but I suspect that the site owners will have to take legal and technical advice about reducing their liability versus the cost/ effect on user experience.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

I can't say I've ever scrolled across a vagina on Instagram they aren't allowed same as a penis - nor have I had one sent to me unsolicited - I fail to see your point.

If your referring to women I'm bikinis and such the male chest is also permitted on such sites.

Again this is regarding consent.

A she can show her cleavages so I can spam unsuspecting victims with my cock arguement is totally void.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eeling0880Man 36 weeks ago

Pennines

Girl I was seeing a couple of years ago asked me to send a cock picture so I sent her a picture of a chicken …. She did find it funny, although I have naughty pictures on here I’m not sending anything like that individually…potentially bite you in the ass

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with"....

^^^^^^^ I totally agree with you....it's not just Insta though obvs. Women are apparently unsolicitly sending graphic sexually explicit pics on lots of platforms in dms including here.

Not to long ago someone on fab kept sending me unsolicited massive tit pics which lets say weren't very attractive, Not 'Sexually Explicit' persay but still I didn't want the pics.

Some one else here has said quote "can men go topless on insta" ....of course they can....Can men go topless on beaches yes....can women go topless on beaches....that's prohibited on lots of beaches especially in Ireland. To me topless photos regardless of sex aren't graphically explicit compared to genital exposure & it happens alot.

I always knew exposing genitals unsolicitly online was flashing & as someone else said "it's no different to somebody doing it on the street"....

Let the same rule, law & consequences be for all sexes

I personally do not think topless images are the same as genital images or images of explicit sex acts. That Ireland is generally prudish about boobs is cultural. Womens chests are nothing to be prudish about, in my view. I still agree that direct DM'ing of unsolicited boob pictures is probably ill advised but it's nowhere near the same level of concern as sending penis or vulva pics.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ackardMan 36 weeks ago

North West & beyond

I’d be inclined to say that if someone sends unsolicited photos of that nature on here then it could be classed as cyber flashing. Just because you are a member of this site it doesn’t mean you consent to an individual directly sending you images of that nature.

However if you are browsing photos and videos on this site thats different as you are aware to expect to see explicit images.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"I’d be inclined to say that if someone sends unsolicited photos of that nature on here then it could be classed as cyber flashing. Just because you are a member of this site it doesn’t mean you consent to an individual directly sending you images of that nature.

However if you are browsing photos and videos on this site thats different as you are aware to expect to see explicit images."

I would tend to agree with this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

I don't think we'll see convictions based on actions on this site, except in very extreme circumstances. The law here is very specific and the bar is high; I predict most convictions will actually be "airdrop"-like situations where the victim is in public and the perpetrator can be assumed to be nearby. What will be interesting is prosecutions on entirely online actions, but I suspect those will be based on Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/etc.

Of course, just because it's not illegal doesn't make it right..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

I’m not persuing any kind of action from that tribute but it could be done under new legislation.

I have however blocked the used

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *omKsubSMan 36 weeks ago

Newton

"What a great outcome!

It did make me wonder about the unsolicited tribute and where it would stand…

I think it's a case of would a reasonable person expect to be exposed to pictures of that nature, even unrequested, on a sex/swinger/hookup site.

The answer is yes, so all you can do is say you dont want those type of pictures unless you specifically request them on your profile and block anyone who ignores.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I don't think we'll see convictions based on actions on this site, except in very extreme circumstances. The law here is very specific and the bar is high; I predict most convictions will actually be "airdrop"-like situations where the victim is in public and the perpetrator can be assumed to be nearby. What will be interesting is prosecutions on entirely online actions, but I suspect those will be based on Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/etc.

Of course, just because it's not illegal doesn't make it right.."

I haven't read the specific law and I am sort of thinking generally about how laws against cyberflashing might apply on different types of social media sites.

I agree that action is very unlikely to happen based on this site - also because the victim would have to be made public and no one is likely to want to admit in open court (accessible to family, employers, fellow school mums, etc) that they're here.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

However if you are browsing photos and videos on this site thats different as you are aware to expect to see explicit images."

I totally agree, if I browse I'm choosing to see however I specifically ask not to have them in my inbox, I don't have a choice but to see those unless I ignore every message with a photo attached.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arlot o scaraWoman 36 weeks ago

Hell

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words"

One girl has done it, and it’s been universally criticised by others in the industry.

As for girls flashing on instagram, you have the same amount of flesh out on your profile.

Nipples and genitalia are not the same thing, dude.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

However if you are browsing photos and videos on this site thats different as you are aware to expect to see explicit images.

I totally agree, if I browse I'm choosing to see however I specifically ask not to have them in my inbox, I don't have a choice but to see those unless I ignore every message with a photo attached.

Mrs "

Yes. When I say I'd want an opt in/ out option, that would be my inbox.

On a site like this, browsing, you takes your chances. Inbox, in an ideal world I'd like to be able to tick a box that either disables certain types of pictures or gives a big bold STOP THINK warning like when you've sent someone a message and they haven't replied.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with"....

^^^^^^^ I totally agree with you....it's not just Insta though obvs. Women are apparently unsolicitly sending graphic sexually explicit pics on lots of platforms in dms including here.

Not to long ago someone on fab kept sending me unsolicited massive tit pics which lets say weren't very attractive, Not 'Sexually Explicit' persay but still I didn't want the pics.

I always knew exposing genitals unsolicitly online was flashing & as someone else said "it's no different to somebody doing it on the street"....

Let the same rule, law & consequences be for all sexes

Yes that's what I said.... Tit Pics Aren't Graphically Sexually Explicit Obviously.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words"

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *J_OuizziCouple 36 weeks ago

Nottingham

However if you are browsing photos and videos on this site thats different as you are aware to expect to see explicit images.

I would tend to agree with this. "

That would be my take too. Browsing profiles means you have consented to see that persons pictures.

Someone sending unsolicited pics to your inbox is cyber flashing.

Anyway, however complex the application of the law becomes it is great that this first case has resulted in a conviction. Hopefully men - and it is overwhelmingly men - will take note and change their behaviour for the better.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *J_OuizziCouple 36 weeks ago

Nottingham

I agree, I don’t use twitter or x though, I didn’t realise that there was adult content too.

Oh God yes, Twitter was a veritable haven of filth and depravity back in the day, it was utterly wonderful.

In fact that is where Ouizzi and I met

It was great fun until Space Karen came along and ruined it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

Are bare male torsos allowed on Instagram? "

Topless men and topless women aren’t quite the same thing though, are they! More’s the pity … fine with me if women want to take their tops off on a warm day

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

I agree, I don’t use twitter or x though, I didn’t realise that there was adult content too.

Oh God yes, Twitter was a veritable haven of filth and depravity back in the day, it was utterly wonderful.

In fact that is where Ouizzi and I met

It was great fun until Space Karen came along and ruined it.

Interesting. I've heard that there's a huge rise in porn bots since Space Karen came along.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *J_OuizziCouple 36 weeks ago

Nottingham

Interesting. I've heard that there's a huge rise in porn bots since Space Karen came along."

Yep - porn bits, Nazis, transphobes, racists and misogynists all welcome and encouraged by L'il Elmo.

It's really sad, because Kink Twitter was a very friendly, welcoming, creative place, with lots of interaction between folks - not just sexual. Almost completely gone now.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

Interesting. I've heard that there's a huge rise in porn bots since Space Karen came along.

Yep - porn bits, Nazis, transphobes, racists and misogynists all welcome and encouraged by L'il Elmo.

It's really sad, because Kink Twitter was a very friendly, welcoming, creative place, with lots of interaction between folks - not just sexual. Almost completely gone now."

Yes. It's something I miss, although I never used it in a sexual way.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out."

Where did he defend a sex offender?

All I read was that the poster said he hoped women would be dealt with in the same way, and put forward a very weak argument re topless shots.

I can’t see where he “vigorously defended” a sex offender. Was it on a different post to the one you were replying to?

For clarity, I think the jail sentence is a good outcome, and no, I don’t think bare tits on IG is equivalent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *a LunaWoman 36 weeks ago

South Wales

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out."

I’m sorry but he really isn’t, at all. And to allude to the fact he is I find unfair.

His post says what it says. That he hopes women who flash also get treated the same.

How you can infer from that, that he is supporting the man charged, is a big leap.

You may not agree with his opinion, that’s fine. But don’t try and tar him as some ableist monster.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *J_OuizziCouple 36 weeks ago

Nottingham

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ad NannaWoman 36 weeks ago

East London

I might be wrong but scrolling Instagram and seeing boobs doesn't seem the same as opening a WhatsApp message sent directly to me and finding a penis pic.

Is it?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs "

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out. "

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tomMan 36 weeks ago

Chelmsford

Most people think that a topless pic is no big deal compared to genitalia.

Is it time to bring back page 3 of the Sun..?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence."

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ornycougaWoman 36 weeks ago

NORWAY Wherever I lay my hat

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

A code of conduct would be helpful on here. It's 3 years since I joined and I honestly can't recall if I ticked something to say I would abide by the site rules.... But this, or an updated version with more teeth, could at least be used as a stick to handle bad behaviour on here

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay. "

Men walk around with their bare chests out in public all the time. The second the outdoor temp is in double figures, there are guys with their shirts off. The comparison being made is with toplessness in men and women. Not penises or other genital related nudity. However, technically, it's not illegal to be naked in public. If it were, the annual Naked Bike Ride through Manchester would generate mass arrests. It doesn't.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

In the version in my head where I'd opt out of unsolicited dick pics, I'd like to see people who send them to me anyway get some sort of penalty from admin.

(As in, a message comes up like the stop think message if you go to message a user who doesn't want unsolicited pictures. "User has opted into our Unsolicited Pictures policy. Please remember that if you send them a picture of your genitals, actions shots, etc, you may be penalised by admin")

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ymAndIcedCoffeeWoman 36 weeks ago

Worcester

I really hope that the more we talk about this kind of thing, the more men realise it's *actually illegal* for them to send their dick pics to people without consent.

It won't stop all of them, but perhaps it might stop some of them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence."

I'm afraid you Cannot "walk around with either out"....re-tits or cock. So you think we can walk around streets in town with our tits & cocks out ....are you serious that you think that

& that you think "it's ok providing there's no intent to cause offense"....It's still indecent exposure.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay.

Ridiculous. Of course they’re exceptions (nudist beaches etc) and while I am all for women walking around with their tits out, that doesn’t mean in any normal circumstance it wouldn’t be classed as indecent exposure. The comparison to topless men and topless women isn’t compared.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.

I’m sorry but he really isn’t, at all. And to allude to the fact he is I find unfair.

His post says what it says. That he hopes women who flash also get treated the same.

How you can infer from that, that he is supporting the man charged, is a big leap.

You may not agree with his opinion, that’s fine. But don’t try and tar him as some ableist monster.

"Whataboutism" is, by it's nature, a defensive argument. In this circumstance;

"A man exposed himself to a child"

"Well what about the women exposing themselves to persons unspecified?!"

Whataboutism, by nature, is a tool to deflect blame and to justify an opinion or act by implying that any criticism of that act or opinion is unjust.

The poster may not have explicitly stated support for the convicted in clear and concise terms, but in this instance that's just semantics. The context and usage of the argument fallacy in question is clearly phrased as a rebuttal to the overwhelming stance that this man's conviction is a positive thing, and uses further logical fallacy (non sequitur, false equivalency, anecdotal and arguably a hint of straw man) to accuse women of being at fault.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay.

Why is it different?

Should it be different?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

Man send cock pic to child - Bad.

Man get punished for sending cock pic to child - Good.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay.

Exactly. A man stood topless at the school gates isn’t indecent, a woman however, is…. We have to be sensible about this! It’s common sense and public decency. We all have a brain cell (even if it’s shared between us) I’m sure we know right from wrong!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ewcatWoman 36 weeks ago

Berkshire

This is a great start.

Consent is everything. Why people still think sending unsolicited genitalia pictures is ok is mind boggling. Even on here, we have photo galleries, fill them with what you like. People can make their own decision to look, or not. There is no need to send unsolicited photos out to everyone.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

"Man send cock pic to child - Bad.

Man get punished for sending cock pic to child - Good.

I mean, you'd really hope it was that simple, wouldn't you?!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman 36 weeks ago

Paradise, Herts

I’ve just read a bit about this in depth and I don’t see how it can’t include this site the way it’s worded.

The offence covers the sending of an unsolicited sexual image to people via social media, dating apps, text message or data-sharing services such as Bluetooth and AirDrop.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay.

It is not immediately illegal to be naked or have your breasts bare in public.

"It's not an offence to be naked in public in England and Wales but it does become an offence if it can be proved the person stripped off with the intention to upset and shock. The complainant has to prove this.

In Scottish law there is no statutory offence, just the common law offence of offending public decency - a strand of the breach of the peace. The test is essentially the same as in English law, that a member of the public has been put in a state of fear or alarm.

According to the Crown Prosecution Service "a balance needs to be struck between the naturist's right to freedom of expression and the right of the wider public to be protected from harassment, alarm and distress"."

Whether it is sensible/advisable is quite another question. However, the fact is that it is only illegal if the person who is unclothed intends to harm or cause distress. There's a lot of information on the web about what constitutes legal and illegal public nudity online (reputable sites!) but rules here prevent the links being posted, e.g. College for Policing website.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay. "

That's pretty much correct

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs "

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid. "

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.

I’m sorry but he really isn’t, at all. And to allude to the fact he is I find unfair.

His post says what it says. That he hopes women who flash also get treated the same.

How you can infer from that, that he is supporting the man charged, is a big leap.

You may not agree with his opinion, that’s fine. But don’t try and tar him as some ableist monster.

"Whataboutism" is, by it's nature, a defensive argument. In this circumstance;

"A man exposed himself to a child"

"Well what about the women exposing themselves to persons unspecified?!"

Whataboutism, by nature, is a tool to deflect blame and to justify an opinion or act by implying that any criticism of that act or opinion is unjust.

That’s not what happened.

He didn’t say “what about …” or offer any defence whatsoever if the person who has been jailed.

He said he hoped women would defend the same consequences if they did the same thing. Fair enough.

He then offered a weak example of someone who he thought should face consequences, for going topless on IG.

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic."

Agreed, it is not the same thing.

You add “in this country”. In what countries is it normal for women to walk down the street topless? And I don’t mean topless beaches, I mean the local Main Street or local park.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out. "

Again comparing an online chest pic with an UNSOLICITED dick pic is redundant - no one is discussing who can walk around topless.

Cyber flashing is against the law, trying to justify it comparing it with boobs is ridiculous.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple 36 weeks ago

Wallasey

Maybe I'm being a bit blonde but just thought of something.

Whenever we post pics we have to describe it, from Face to XXX. You can choose to see whatever category of pic when you look under the 'pic' tab.

Surely then fab could introduce this as a filter in messages, the same as age, sex, smoking, ethnicity.

That should be simple, job done, more unwanted willie's.

What do you guys think?

Mrs x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

Again comparing an online chest pic with an UNSOLICITED dick pic is redundant - no one is discussing who can walk around topless.

Cyber flashing is against the law, trying to justify it comparing it with boobs is ridiculous.

Mrs "

Who tried justifying cyber flashing?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple 36 weeks ago

Wallasey

No more not more unwanted pics haha x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic.

Agreed, it is not the same thing.

You add “in this country”. In what countries is it normal for women to walk down the street topless? And I don’t mean topless beaches, I mean the local Main Street or local park. "

Wasn't unusual in East Africa.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic.

Agreed, it is not the same thing.

You add “in this country”. In what countries is it normal for women to walk down the street topless? And I don’t mean topless beaches, I mean the local Main Street or local park.

Wasn't unusual in East Africa.

Let’s agree on “in most countries” then, rather than “in this country” which kinda suggests that the UK is a bit of an outlier

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"Let’s agree on “in most countries” then, rather than “in this country” which kinda suggests that the UK is a bit of an outlier"

It kinda suggests not everyone in the world has difficulty coping with the sight of the female nipple.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

As far as I’m aware you have to sign up and pay for only fans, not really same as some bloke sending a picture of his cock to a child.

Good to see what you think is equivalent though.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Maybe I'm being a bit blonde but just thought of something.

Whenever we post pics we have to describe it, from Face to XXX. You can choose to see whatever category of pic when you look under the 'pic' tab.

Surely then fab could introduce this as a filter in messages, the same as age, sex, smoking, ethnicity.

That should be simple, job done, more unwanted willie's.

What do you guys think?

Mrs x"

I think it's a good start, but it won't account for direct photos and photos that are incorrectly classified. I think a warning would be needed as well.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.

I’m sorry but he really isn’t, at all. And to allude to the fact he is I find unfair.

His post says what it says. That he hopes women who flash also get treated the same.

How you can infer from that, that he is supporting the man charged, is a big leap.

You may not agree with his opinion, that’s fine. But don’t try and tar him as some ableist monster.

"Whataboutism" is, by it's nature, a defensive argument. In this circumstance;

"A man exposed himself to a child"

"Well what about the women exposing themselves to persons unspecified?!"

Whataboutism, by nature, is a tool to deflect blame and to justify an opinion or act by implying that any criticism of that act or opinion is unjust.

That’s not what happened.

He didn’t say “what about …” or offer any defence whatsoever if the person who has been jailed.

He said he hoped women would defend the same consequences if they did the same thing. Fair enough.

He then offered a weak example of someone who he thought should face consequences, for going topless on IG.

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t "

Again, semantics. You can't say whataboutism doesn't count unless you actually say the words "what about". The fact is, he made a (weak) argument to deflect blame by drawing attention to an unrelated issue. That's whataboutism. You can't claim he was simply stating that the law should be applied to all, the post was so thick with passive aggression that you could stand a spoon up in it. That level of passive aggression, I feel, supports the term "vigorously". You can argue that "technically he didn't say XYZ" but that's reductive and unhelpful when the tone and implication of the post is so abundantly clear.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic.

Agreed, it is not the same thing.

You add “in this country”. In what countries is it normal for women to walk down the street topless? And I don’t mean topless beaches, I mean the local Main Street or local park. "

Croatia.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

" the post was so thick with passive aggression that you could stand a spoon up in it. "

May I please commend you for this statement. It has made me grin so broadly that the phrase "Cheshire cat" doesn't do it justice. Thank you

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atnip make me purrWoman 36 weeks ago

Reading

I agree i don't even like them on this site let alone out of the blue and to a 15 year old!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"Let’s agree on “in most countries” then, rather than “in this country” which kinda suggests that the UK is a bit of an outlier

It kinda suggests not everyone in the world has difficulty coping with the sight of the female nipple."

No. It suggests that many societies (particularly firer world) are a bit prudish, and don’t condone bare female breasts being displayed in public.

The key words here are “in public”

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

Men and women being topless isn’t the same thing. It just isn’t.

If you disagree, try walking around the local park with your tits out when it gets sunny … if you’re right, nobody will bat an eyelid.

It isn't the same thing (in this country). But it's kinda pathetic.

Agreed, it is not the same thing.

You add “in this country”. In what countries is it normal for women to walk down the street topless? And I don’t mean topless beaches, I mean the local Main Street or local park.

Croatia. "

Eh, no.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"So the 1st cyber flasher has been jailed for 66 weeks!

I'm so pleased this is a thing, he sent his erect cock over social media to a 15 year old girl & a women - the woman reported him.

I hope this is the start of many more to come.

Women and girls shouldn't be receiving unsolicited images on social media these men are no better than a flasher on the street.

Mrs

Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?

That is some magnificent whataboutery! Absolutely splendid!

That's not 'whataboutery'

That's 'themtooism'

See, everyone can make up words

You're vigorously defending a sex offender who exposed himself to a child, blaming women for his actions and then doubling-down when somebody points out how utterly grotesque that is?

That's a bold strategy. Let's see how it works out.

I’m sorry but he really isn’t, at all. And to allude to the fact he is I find unfair.

His post says what it says. That he hopes women who flash also get treated the same.

How you can infer from that, that he is supporting the man charged, is a big leap.

You may not agree with his opinion, that’s fine. But don’t try and tar him as some ableist monster.

"Whataboutism" is, by it's nature, a defensive argument. In this circumstance;

"A man exposed himself to a child"

"Well what about the women exposing themselves to persons unspecified?!"

Whataboutism, by nature, is a tool to deflect blame and to justify an opinion or act by implying that any criticism of that act or opinion is unjust.

That’s not what happened.

He didn’t say “what about …” or offer any defence whatsoever if the person who has been jailed.

He said he hoped women would defend the same consequences if they did the same thing. Fair enough.

He then offered a weak example of someone who he thought should face consequences, for going topless on IG.

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

He did not defend the sec offender. He agreed with the arrest and sentencing .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan 36 weeks ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

You can walk around with either out, providing there's no intent to cause offence.

Excellent, I’ll remember this when I’m walking through the middle of town. As long as I tell people I’m not intending to cause offence, I should be okay. "

You would be OK.

A naturist couple went for a meal in a local pub in Burnham on Sea last year.

Naked.

They weren't breaking the law, and whilst a few people complained to the local paper of course, nothing happened bar a lot of conversations in the local community and on social media.

They intended no offence to be caused, so no risk of any prosecution. Apologies for the link being the Mail - was the first that popped up.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12168491/Diners-left-speechless-naked-couple-walk-pub-enjoy-meal.html

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

He did not defend the sec offender. He agreed with the arrest and sentencing ."

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

I'm not sure you're reading the same post as me. I don't see any support of arrest or sentencing, all I'm seeing is "NO, ARREST THE WOMEN!"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *jorkishMan 36 weeks ago

Seaforth

Good sentence. Why wasn't he put on sex register though?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"I think the threads derailed slightly.

Tits and cock aren't a comparison.

Tits and chest yes.

Vag and cock yes.

Comparing an online chest pic to an unsolicited cock pic is totally redundant.

Mrs

No, that’s not correct. You can’t walk around in public with your tits out because it would be classed as indecent exposure, just like it would if you had your cock out.

Again comparing an online chest pic with an UNSOLICITED dick pic is redundant - no one is discussing who can walk around topless.

Cyber flashing is against the law, trying to justify it comparing it with boobs is ridiculous.

Mrs

Who tried justifying cyber flashing? "

Well you replied to my comparing an online chest (notice chest not tit) pic isn't the same as an unsolicited cock pic with this mumbo jumbo about being outside with your tits out which isn't at all relevant, stating "No that's not correct" - it is.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman 36 weeks ago

Paradise, Herts

"Good sentence. Why wasn't he put on sex register though? "

He’s already on it I think

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

He did not defend the sec offender. He agreed with the arrest and sentencing .

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

I'm not sure you're reading the same post as me. I don't see any support of arrest or sentencing, all I'm seeing is "NO, ARREST THE WOMEN!" "

He did say "similarly dealt with though"....

He should have left it at the "women flashing themselves on Insta"....as far as I know sexually graphic pics of genitalia can be sent privately on Insta....maybe that's what he meant ....

Bringing up Only Fans & breast exposure is a totally different thing to unsolicitedly sending graphic genitalia....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entInEssexMan 36 weeks ago

Grays

I agree with this and there should be more defined rules about what is acceptable behaviour and what’s not! (Even on a site such as this one). It’s up to the sites management team to develop this. If you are rude in a chat room, the have moderators that can report and remove you… why can this not be further developed into the messaging system? Personally I don’t send unsolicited pictures to anyone, it’s just frigging rude!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman 36 weeks ago

Paradise, Herts

I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entInEssexMan 36 weeks ago

Grays

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit.

I can very much see a loophole on sites like these, where consent is implied for some (if not all) things that would be against this law on LinkedIn.

Round of applause as I whole heartedly agree with this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram "

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

He did not defend the sec offender. He agreed with the arrest and sentencing .

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

I'm not sure you're reading the same post as me. I don't see any support of arrest or sentencing, all I'm seeing is "NO, ARREST THE WOMEN!" "

He did not defend the offender.

And he certainly didn’t “vigorously” defend the offender.

Defending the offender would mean something like saying the guy should nit have been charged, or that there was nothing wrong with what he did. The poster did not do that.

Saying that other people should be arrested in no way says that the original offender should not have been arrested.

He did not say that the offender should not have been arrested / convicted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"Good sentence. Why wasn't he put on sex register though?

He’s already on it I think "

Yeah he was on it before he committed the cyber flashing offence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tomMan 36 weeks ago

Chelmsford

What about Papa New Guinea

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"What about Papa New Guinea"

Great tune.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory."

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman 36 weeks ago

Paradise, Herts

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory."

I have a 15 year old daughter and whilst I wouldn’t be keen on her seeing boobs on Instagram it doesn’t even come anywhere near to an erect penis being sent privately! Same for my 26 year old. Not even comparable in the slightest.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram "

I know right, there's literally zero comparison!

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"Good sentence. Why wasn't he put on sex register though? "

Where did you read that he wasn’t?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

I know right, there's literally zero comparison!

Mrs "

It's a fun derail from the topic though.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

I know right, there's literally zero comparison!

Mrs "

Absolutely, not the same thing at all

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan 36 weeks ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

"I agree with this and there should be more defined rules about what is acceptable behaviour and what’s not! (Even on a site such as this one). It’s up to the sites management team to develop this. If you are rude in a chat room, the have moderators that can report and remove you… why can this not be further developed into the messaging system? Personally I don’t send unsolicited pictures to anyone, it’s just frigging rude!

If offensive messages are sent they can be reported and admin will investigate.

Given the volume of messages that are sent daily on here it would be impossible to moderate each and every one given mods are volunteers.

However with an absence of any tick box to show your view on explicit photo content it's down to the individual to decide if something isn't to their liking and the easiest and fastest way to prevent it happening again from the same individual is to block them and delete the message. What offends some may be welcomed by others.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *atcherwankerMan 36 weeks ago

Birmingham

I am happy to argue that point with him and say that I don’t see moral equivalence. But in no way do I see that he has offered what you described as “vigorous defence” of a sex offender.

He didn’t

He did not defend the sec offender. He agreed with the arrest and sentencing .

"Let's hope all the women flashing themselves in Instagram are similarly dealt with

Recently OF girls were using fake dolls and making 'breast feeding' video's to get their tits out bypassing the censors

Let's keep the same energy yeah?"

I'm not sure you're reading the same post as me. I don't see any support of arrest or sentencing, all I'm seeing is "NO, ARREST THE WOMEN!"

He did not defend the offender.

And he certainly didn’t “vigorously” defend the offender.

Defending the offender would mean something like saying the guy should nit have been charged, or that there was nothing wrong with what he did. The poster did not do that.

Saying that other people should be arrested in no way says that the original offender should not have been arrested.

He did not say that the offender should not have been arrested / convicted. "

*Sigh* have we really got to have the conversation about whataboutism being an inherently defensive logical fallacy again? Just so you can tell me that it doesn't count because he didn't say Simon Says, again? I don't have the energy or the balance to keep going round in circles.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something? "

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

If offensive messages are sent they can be reported and admin will investigate.

Given the volume of messages that are sent daily on here it would be impossible to moderate each and every one given mods are volunteers.

Yes.

My suggestions are very much - if this new law applied to the site, a tick box of yes/no (and a warning when messaging people who don't want these pictures) would make moderating it easier. (I don't think there's a way to do it for general pictures other than "you're on an adult site, you take your chances")

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *exymilf_69Woman 36 weeks ago

yorkshire

He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

Although opinions on fab forum are fine, that’s all they are - what matters in this case is, did the CPS have enough evidence to prosecute him under the law and get a conviction? and it appears they did

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"I really hope this case is talked about a lot and people realise this behavior is not ok.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icolerobbieCouple 36 weeks ago

walsall

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory."

Any evidence to back this statement up?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?"

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs "

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

Yes they did. As for fab opinions, it seems that there is universal agreement that this is a positive development

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)"

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn? "

I do know a lot of women complain about getting sexual messages on LinkedIn. I don't know if that includes pictures.

What I'm getting at is, I'm not clear if the law applies here, but there are places where it should clearly apply.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"No entry on the sex offenders register for exposing himself to a minor?"

IKR I was expecting that result. Thats more of a concern that he messaged a minor than sending it in general

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTable OP Couple 36 weeks ago

Leeds

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn? "

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *J_OuizziCouple 36 weeks ago

Nottingham

"No entry on the sex offenders register for exposing himself to a minor?

IKR I was expecting that result. Thats more of a concern that he messaged a minor than sending it in general "

He was already on the SOR until 2033 after being convicted last year for exposure to another underage girl. He is now subject to a 15 year Sexual Harm Prevention Order.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

Does that mean sending non consented pics of tits or cock on any media is lawful? Asking for a friend of Instagram..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn? "

And other media outlets.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"No entry on the sex offenders register for exposing himself to a minor?

IKR I was expecting that result. Thats more of a concern that he messaged a minor than sending it in general

He was already on the SOR until 2033 after being convicted last year for exposure to another underage girl. He is now subject to a 15 year Sexual Harm Prevention Order."

Omg how was he allowed in the internet. I thought it was monitored?

good I hope they extended the SOR as well

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

Remember page 3 that got banned.

So did a class of beer with women with tits out...

How many under age read the sun or had a drink of lager smothered in tits.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

"Just because I post pictures on here, it doesn't mean I'm consenting to receiving pictures or worse tributes.

Sadly though on here it is a daily occurrence. Perhaps that consent is assumed by some people, however consent should be explicit. "

Or make it a filter?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case? "

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *omKsubSMan 36 weeks ago

Newton

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me."

My concern was more as to why the focus was on the adult rather than the child, and asking why he wasn't on the sex offenders register (before I found out he already was)

Personally I think the sentence was not harsh enough and should have been doubled for a minor being targeted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

On the beeb now

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entInEssexMan 36 weeks ago

Grays

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I do know a lot of women complain about getting sexual messages on LinkedIn. I don't know if that includes pictures.

What I'm getting at is, I'm not clear if the law applies here, but there are places where it should clearly apply."

The law should apply no matter of the site or social media platform you are using surely? You can differentiate, a law is a law in my opinion

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

And a 60 year old

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 36 weeks ago

And some random sent me a video. Never asked for it how does that sit on sites like this?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *panksspankedMan 36 weeks ago

Edinburgh

There's been a law in Scotland in place since 2010. Only 5 per cent of cases have resulted in convictions. The legal stumbling block has been proving the offender's motivation

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ty31Man 36 weeks ago

NW London

"And some random sent me a video. Never asked for it how does that sit on sites like this? "

Sites like this have an implied consent - the disclaimer is that you automatically consent to seeing images of an adult nature.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I do know a lot of women complain about getting sexual messages on LinkedIn. I don't know if that includes pictures.

What I'm getting at is, I'm not clear if the law applies here, but there are places where it should clearly apply.

The law should apply no matter of the site or social media platform you are using surely? You can differentiate, a law is a law in my opinion

Of course you can differentiate. I don't know how it would play out with this specific law, but laws have cut outs and exceptions and context all the time.

If I cut someone open, I've committed a pretty serious assault/ battery. If a surgeon does it, they're doing their job.

If I punch someone in the face I'm committing a pretty serious assault. A boxer is not.

If I kill someone I'm a murderer - except if there was reasonable self defence.

If I take your jacket I'm a thief - unless I intended to return it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs "

Seriously? You have had cock pics sent to you on LinkedIn?

I have had approaches from people who were clearly sex workers, but one flagging of their message and they are gone from LinkedIn in minutes

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me."

That’s a huge leap. I don’t buy it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky_couple2020Couple 36 weeks ago

North West

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs

Seriously? You have had cock pics sent to you on LinkedIn?

I have had approaches from people who were clearly sex workers, but one flagging of their message and they are gone from LinkedIn in minutes "

Women can get cock pics sent literally anywhere.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs

Seriously? You have had cock pics sent to you on LinkedIn?

I have had approaches from people who were clearly sex workers, but one flagging of their message and they are gone from LinkedIn in minutes

Women can get cock pics sent literally anywhere. "

Yup. And I guess all I'm saying - I didn't think it was this difficult - is that it's about degrees of bad.

While I don't want unsolicited genital pictures on here, it's an eyeroll and a block.

On LinkedIn it's a whole lot worse.

I can see a world where case law and precedent comes from this law that differentiates based on context.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me."

If a man comments on something other than the age of the young victim, then you assume that the underage victim is not the poster’s main concern, and therefore they must condone sexual activity with underage kids? That’s your logic?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs

Seriously? You have had cock pics sent to you on LinkedIn?

I have had approaches from people who were clearly sex workers, but one flagging of their message and they are gone from LinkedIn in minutes

Women can get cock pics sent literally anywhere.

Yup. And I guess all I'm saying - I didn't think it was this difficult - is that it's about degrees of bad.

While I don't want unsolicited genital pictures on here, it's an eyeroll and a block.

On LinkedIn it's a whole lot worse.

I can see a world where case law and precedent comes from this law that differentiates based on context."

Thanks for clarifying. I’m stunned / horrified. Can’t believe such activity takes place on LinkedIn … the most boring platform in the world

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman 36 weeks ago

Manchester (she/her)

"He was already on the sex offenders register for a previous conviction

They did and it's a great step forward!

Mrs

Absolutely. I look forward to seeing whether it deters others, and how far it goes.

(By deter others, I don't necessarily mean on Fab. As stated above, I think Fab is very much an edge case in terms of social media. I mean LinkedIn/ Mumsnet as 110% clear cut cases)

People have been posting cock pics on mumsnet and LinkedIn?

I've had many during my time on Linkedin, I'm not on mums net to comment.

Mrs

Seriously? You have had cock pics sent to you on LinkedIn?

I have had approaches from people who were clearly sex workers, but one flagging of their message and they are gone from LinkedIn in minutes

Women can get cock pics sent literally anywhere.

Yup. And I guess all I'm saying - I didn't think it was this difficult - is that it's about degrees of bad.

While I don't want unsolicited genital pictures on here, it's an eyeroll and a block.

On LinkedIn it's a whole lot worse.

I can see a world where case law and precedent comes from this law that differentiates based on context.

Thanks for clarifying. I’m stunned / horrified. Can’t believe such activity takes place on LinkedIn … the most boring platform in the world "

Arseholes are arseholes whether their profile picture has a suit or a stretched out arsehole.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ebauchedDeviantsPt2Couple 36 weeks ago

Cumbria

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me.

It’s not logic, it’s an impression, maybe even a feeling. It’s not a debate as far as I’m concerned, there’s no argument to be won or lost. It’s the impression some men on fab give me and it doesn’t need to be justified.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *immyinreadingMan 36 weeks ago

henley on thames

"I can’t believe people are even arguing about this. The bloke sent his dick to a 15 year old!!!

How can that even compare with a pair of bangers on fucking Instagram

There’s a disturbing number of men on fab who seem to think the age of consent is advisory.

Any examples? I don’t think I have seen any examples of men saying that age of consent is advisory. Have I missed something?

Are you making the mistake of thinking that you actually have to say “I think the age of consent is advisory” in order to appear like you consider it advisory?

No. I’m asking for examples though. What posts made you feel that this is the case?

In this thread there are men whose concern in this is not that a man sent a dick pic to a child, that says it all for me.

It’s a strong and disgusting accusation to make, based on “an impression”.

I see no evidence for what you are saying, but you are happy to hurl this accusation around.