Female Privilege, part 43989222

[Toni]

The right to privacy is based on a reasonable expectation of privacy. This is why public toilet stalls have doors. In most states, women(and men) have an expectation that what is hidden by their skirt will remain hidden. In the great scheme of things, no real harm was done, but prohibiting upskirt videos is just one of those things we do to keep order.

Imagine you are standing at a urinal and realize the person beside you is filming everything.

At issue is whether someone can have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.

I find the whole notion oxymoronic: only an unreasonable person would expect privacy in public.

So, if I run into you on the sidewalk in the middle of downtown, it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask you to disrobe? What right of privacy do you have which would prevent such a demand?

Or maybe only if some portion of your undergarment is visible does it invalidate your right to privacy? So, if your fly is undone or if your underwear waist band shows a bit when you bend over to tie your shoe: I have a right to demand that you disrobe?

What a person wears under his or her skirt is generally not visible to the public. By design. It is only by design---the surreptitious use of a camera designed to be unnoticed by whomever is using it to see and photography what is not seen in plain sight that what is worn under a skirt is visible. Or by accident, a fall or a big gust of wind, etc.

My stance is that people have the right to privacy of their own body. Period. Wherever they are. Period. I have no right to see what is under your skirt or behind your fly or under your shirt than someone with a camera. Which is no right at all.

 

[JonA]

At issue is whether someone can have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.

I find the whole notion oxymoronic: only an unreasonable person would expect privacy in public.

I know. It's completely unreasonable for women to expect men NOT to look up their skirts at their underwear.

It's not you smoking crack so it must be them, right?

The only crack being smoked here is by the fascists who believe it's the government's job to protect people from themselves.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I know. It's completely unreasonable for women to expect men NOT to look up their skirts at their underwear.

It's not you smoking crack so it must be them, right?

The only crack being smoked here is by the fascists who believe it's the government's job to protect people from themselves.

When you wrote "themselves" you meant pedophiles, right, because young girls in church or in school wear skirts?

 

[JonA]

At issue is whether someone can have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.

I find the whole notion oxymoronic: only an unreasonable person would expect privacy in public.

So, if I run into you on the sidewalk in the middle of downtown, it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask you to disrobe? What right of privacy do you have which would prevent such a demand?

You're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

Or maybe only if some portion of your undergarment is visible does it invalidate your right to privacy? So, if your fly is undone or if your underwear waist band shows a bit when you bend over to tie your shoe: I have a right to demand that you disrobe?

Again, you're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

What a person wears under his or her skirt is generally not visible to the public. By design. It is only by design---the surreptitious use of a camera designed to be unnoticed by whomever is using it to see and photography what is not seen in plain sight that what is worn under a skirt is visible. Or by accident, a fall or a big gust of wind, etc.

My stance is that people have the right to privacy of their own body. Period. Wherever they are. Period. I have no right to see what is under your skirt or behind your fly or under your shirt than someone with a camera. Which is no right at all.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

 

[JonA]

The only crack being smoked here is by the fascists who believe it's the government's job to protect people from themselves.

When you wrote "themselves" you meant pedophiles, right, because young girls in church or in school wear skirts?

Huh?

 

[credoconsolans]

When you wrote "themselves" you meant pedophiles, right, because young girls in church or in school wear skirts?

Huh?

He's saying if your position is that the area under any skirt is to be free for public viewing, then you must support pedophiles who will be looking under little girls' skirts. And those little girls will have a lot of difficulty telling them to Fuck Off. Which as many women know, doesn't really work well with some men.

- - - Updated - - -

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

 

[JonA]

Huh?

And those little girls will have a lot of difficulty telling them to Fuck Off. Which as many women know, doesn't really work well with some men.

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

 

[Arctish]

And those little girls will have a lot of difficulty telling them to Fuck Off. Which as many women know, doesn't really work well with some men.

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

Do you recommend spacesuits or burqas for back-to-school wear? It's possible that a gust of wind could lift the hem of a burqa, thereby inviting any nearby pedophiles to stick their heads down by a girl's ankles to get a peek at her My Little Pony panties, but wearing spacesuits makes it hard to sit at a desk. Plus they can get awfully stuffy this time of year.

 

[JonA]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

Do you recommend spacesuits or burqas for back-to-school wear? It's possible that a gust of wind could lift the hem of a burqa, thereby inviting any nearby pedophiles to stick their heads down by a girl's ankles to get a peek at her My Little Pony panties, but wearing spacesuits makes it hard to sit at a desk. Plus they can get awfully stuffy this time of year.

I don't find it appropriate for somebody to stick their head down by someone's ankles whether to look up their skirt or check out their shoes.

 

[Angry Floof]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

Do you recommend spacesuits or burqas for back-to-school wear? It's possible that a gust of wind could lift the hem of a burqa, thereby inviting any nearby pedophiles to stick their heads down by a girl's ankles to get a peek at her My Little Pony panties, but wearing spacesuits makes it hard to sit at a desk. Plus they can get awfully stuffy this time of year.

I don't find it appropriate for somebody to stick their head down by someone's ankles whether to look up their skirt or check out their shoes.

But sticking a camera down there for the same purpose is OK?

You've dug yourself into a corner. lol

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

Or rapists should stop raping people.

 

[Angry Floof]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

And grown ass men can damn well control themselves when looking at little girls regardless of what they're wearing. It's none of your fucking business what anyone else is wearing. Maybe you could work on your own disgusting mind instead of pointing fingers at other people.

 

[Toni]

So a girl or a woman or presumably a man can wear a skirt down to the floor--or maybe their ankles and they would THEN have a reasonable expectation of sufficient privacy that someone wouldn't try to get a camera shot of what is up their skirts? I am assuming, of course, that they don't wear shiny shoes.

And that any other length of skirt is 'dressing like a sex worker?'

Wow. For a repressed right wing religious nut, JonA certainly has no problem casually using the word fuck.

- - - Updated - - -

So, if I run into you on the sidewalk in the middle of downtown, it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask you to disrobe? What right of privacy do you have which would prevent such a demand?

You're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

Or maybe only if some portion of your undergarment is visible does it invalidate your right to privacy? So, if your fly is undone or if your underwear waist band shows a bit when you bend over to tie your shoe: I have a right to demand that you disrobe?

Again, you're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

What a person wears under his or her skirt is generally not visible to the public. By design. It is only by design---the surreptitious use of a camera designed to be unnoticed by whomever is using it to see and photography what is not seen in plain sight that what is worn under a skirt is visible. Or by accident, a fall or a big gust of wind, etc.

My stance is that people have the right to privacy of their own body. Period. Wherever they are. Period. I have no right to see what is under your skirt or behind your fly or under your shirt than someone with a camera. Which is no right at all.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

I don't understand why you think you are entitled to privacy but individuals wearing skirts are not.

 

[JonA]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

Do you recommend spacesuits or burqas for back-to-school wear? It's possible that a gust of wind could lift the hem of a burqa, thereby inviting any nearby pedophiles to stick their heads down by a girl's ankles to get a peek at her My Little Pony panties, but wearing spacesuits makes it hard to sit at a desk. Plus they can get awfully stuffy this time of year.

I don't find it appropriate for somebody to stick their head down by someone's ankles whether to look up their skirt or check out their shoes.

But sticking a camera down there for the same purpose is OK?

Just what do you think the cameras look like?

You've dug yourself into a corner. lol

What does it mean to dig oneself into a 'corner'?

 

[JonA]

Wow. For a repressed right wing religious nut, JonA certainly has no problem casually using the word fuck.

You're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

Or maybe only if some portion of your undergarment is visible does it invalidate your right to privacy? So, if your fly is undone or if your underwear waist band shows a bit when you bend over to tie your shoe: I have a right to demand that you disrobe?

Again, you're free to 'demand' whatever you want. And I'm free to tell you to go fuck off.

What a person wears under his or her skirt is generally not visible to the public. By design. It is only by design---the surreptitious use of a camera designed to be unnoticed by whomever is using it to see and photography what is not seen in plain sight that what is worn under a skirt is visible. Or by accident, a fall or a big gust of wind, etc.

My stance is that people have the right to privacy of their own body. Period. Wherever they are. Period. I have no right to see what is under your skirt or behind your fly or under your shirt than someone with a camera. Which is no right at all.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

I don't understand why you think you are entitled to privacy but individuals wearing skirts are not.

Huh? Where did I say I thought I was 'entitled to privacy' (in a public space)?

Please quote my exact words.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

Or rapists should stop raping people.

This thread isn't about rape.

 

[JonA]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

And grown ass men can damn well control themselves when looking at little girls regardless of what they're wearing.

Yes. We'd like that... in a perfect world and all that.

It's none of your fucking business what anyone else is wearing.

That's nonsense. Anything done in public is automatically everyone's business.

Maybe you could work on your own disgusting mind instead of pointing fingers at other people.

If you're saying that taking pictures up people's clothing in public is disgusting, I couldn't agree more.

However I just don't see the justification for outlawing everything I find 'disgusting'.

 

[laughing dog]

Undergarments are worn so as not to be seen in public. I think it reasonable that someone expect that others are not photographing their undergarments without their permission. Apparently, even the GA state legislature agrees, since it plans to change the law in order to make it valid.

Having one's undergarments visible invalidates the claim that one desires them to remain private.

If one has the undergarments in plain view, yes. But they are not in plain view when one is wearing a dress.

 

[credoconsolans]

And those little girls will have a lot of difficulty telling them to Fuck Off. Which as many women know, doesn't really work well with some men.

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

Little girls wearing skirts is the same as a street walker to you? Wow, that's pretty sick.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

and pointed toward the ground, so since no one's normal every day view is upside down looking up, we can expect that their undergarments are not meant for public viewing.

If someone has to contort their normal every day gaze to look up a skirt, that is little different than a peeping Tom grabbing a ladder to look in someone's bedroom window. Their argument is the same as yours:

"Hey a window is made of glass and if I try hard enough I can peek through blinds or around curtains and see inside. That must mean they intended their bedroom windows to be for public viewing".

Right?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

Little girls wearing skirts is the same as a street walker to you? Wow, that's pretty sick.

He's advocating for burqas without realizing it.

 

[KeepTalking]

I agree: Parents should stop dressing their children like sex workers.

If I wear my shirt unbuttoned, is it reasonable for me to think no one will see my undershirt?

A skirt worn properly isn't unbuttoned or unzipped.

No; but it is wide open at one end.

Do you recommend spacesuits or burqas for back-to-school wear? It's possible that a gust of wind could lift the hem of a burqa, thereby inviting any nearby pedophiles to stick their heads down by a girl's ankles to get a peek at her My Little Pony panties, but wearing spacesuits makes it hard to sit at a desk. Plus they can get awfully stuffy this time of year.

I don't find it appropriate for somebody to stick their head down by someone's ankles whether to look up their skirt or check out their shoes.

But sticking a camera down there for the same purpose is OK?

Just what do you think the cameras look like?

I'm not sure what kind of camera the guy in the OP used, but here is an example of a camera he could have used:

Small enough to be hidden in a shoe.