Male flasher confronted in LA Spa

[Valjean]

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal? What about peeping?

Yeah, good question. What about the guy in the trenchcoat showing his junk to schoolgirls through the chainlink fence? It has been standard practice to report and arrest those guys, but maybe we should rethink that (not really).

Trenchcoat flashing is definitely a sexual act directed at a non-consenting individual. It's not the same thing as simply being naked.

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Exactly. The flashers would have no power if we took a sane view of the human body.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.

And even the places where full nudity is legal have no bedlam in the streets.

Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

Exactly. You coming up to my windows and looking in is wrong regardless of what I'm wearing.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Exactly. I should be allowed to walk around inside my house naked if I want. (In practice it's completely safe during daylight hours, but at night there's a window in the bedroom we will leave open if the weather is suitable and there is one window in another house that has a view if we have a light on. Local law considers that indecent exposure.)

 

[TSwizzle]

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Really, so when a man walks into the female changing rooms at the spa, Macy's or whatever with his cock out women should not complain, they and their daughters should learn from that ? There's nothing creepy about it ?

 

[thebeave]

Trenchcoat flashing is definitely a sexual act directed at a non-consenting individual. It's not the same thing as simply being naked.

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Exactly. The flashers would have no power if we took a sane view of the human body.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.

And even the places where full nudity is legal have no bedlam in the streets.

Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

Exactly. You coming up to my windows and looking in is wrong regardless of what I'm wearing.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Exactly. I should be allowed to walk around inside my house naked if I want. (In practice it's completely safe during daylight hours, but at night there's a window in the bedroom we will leave open if the weather is suitable and there is one window in another house that has a view if we have a light on. Local law considers that indecent exposure.)

Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.

 

[Valjean]

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Really, so when a man walks into the female changing rooms at the spa, Macy's or whatever with his cock out women should not complain, they and their daughters should learn from that ? There's nothing creepy about it ?

If the changing room rules require sexual segregation, and women prefer it, then the men should stay out.

 

[Valjean]

Has nobody ever been to a German sauna?
No sexual segregation. A single locker room. Total nudity. Whole families are there: kids, parents, grandparents -- everyone, all naked. Some saunas are really big, with multiple rooms of different temperatures, bars, even cafés.
There's nothing sexual about it, though, oddly, when you sit down at a table the (naked) waiter/ess is shocked if you don't, at least, throw a towel over yourself. Wierd....

Many Finnish schools have saunas. The whole class goes there, little kids and their teachers, both sexes, all naked. All perfectly normal.

In parts of Micronesia women walk/drive around bare-breasted, but try wearing shorts and you'll get arrested. Bare thighs are obscene.

In parts of the New Guinea highlands, men wear only a penis-sheath, leaving the scrotum exposed. If the sheath is accidently dislodged, a man is terribly embarrassed, covers up immediately and replaces his sheath.

It's all cultural. What is shocking is learned, not innate.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.

The trenchcoat guys go up to a specific person and flash them. That's a very different thing than simply walking down the street with the part(s) exposed.

Since this was a trans person I very much doubt they were being blatant about it--trans people don't like their wrong body parts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Has nobody ever been to a German sauna?
No sexual segregation. A single locker room. Total nudity. Whole families are there: kids, parents, grandparents -- everyone, all naked. Some saunas are really big, with multiple rooms of different temperatures, bars, even cafés.
There's nothing sexual about it, though, oddly, when you sit down at a table the (naked) waiter/ess is shocked if you don't, at least, throw a towel over yourself. Wierd....

Many Finnish schools have saunas. The whole class goes there, little kids and their teachers, both sexes, all naked. All perfectly normal.

In parts of Micronesia women walk/drive around bare-breasted, but try wearing shorts and you'll get arrested. Bare thighs are obscene.

In parts of the New Guinea highlands, men wear only a penis-sheath, leaving the scrotum exposed. If the sheath is accidently dislodged, a man is terribly embarrassed, covers up immediately and replaces his sheath.

It's all cultural. What is shocking is learned, not innate.

This. There's nothing that is innately offensive, people have to learn to be offended.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal?

I don't know enough about spa behavior or this particular spa. Do adult females typically flash others including children because you consider disrobing to be flashing? If it is typically done by disrobing, then it appears to be an issue in general, not particular to the trans person. If on the other hand, disrobing is not a thing done under normal circumstances ever by cis women at that place in that room for that purpose, then it would appear the trans person is in error.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal?

I don't know enough about spa behavior or this particular spa. Do adult females typically flash others including children because you consider disrobing to be flashing? If it is typically done by disrobing, then it appears to be an issue in general, not particular to the trans person. If on the other hand, disrobing is not a thing done under normal circumstances ever by cis women at that place in that room for that purpose, then it would appear the trans person is in error.

I would be very surprised if this wasn't a situation where it would be perfectly acceptable had she had the "right" parts down there.