CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 26 minutes ago, Glasgowdom1991 said: It's not really new laws it's more England catching up it's been an offence since 2010 in Scotland, simliar to upskirting when I worked in retail we caught a guy doing it and he was super angry saying he done it all the time and it wasnt a crime he was very sullen when police Scotland came arrested him and informed while it wasn't a crime in England (at that time may have changed) it absolutely was a crime in Scotland and he would be spending time in cells . In the end he got 2 years as police found more on his phone but he was arguing with judge till the last. Kinda what I mentioned above, whilst it's new for England and Wales, it's not for Scotland
DarkArts1066 Posted March 20 Posted March 20 52 minutes ago, CosmicAngel said: I wouldn't dream of sending just anyone photos of my xxxx . Especially as a Hello !! I imagine Men don't mind that as much as Women recieving dxck pics. Or am I wrong? There are plenty of pic collectors out there, who will happily receive an inbox of breasts and other body parts - if you want to send them. Sadly they quite often end up on various sites - as “profile pics” for the “couple profile” that John Smith has put up, in the hopes of finding someone to play with his “wife” or “girlfriend” and he. I don’t fully understand the psychology of that to be honest - it seems silly to me, but it happens. Maybe his thinking is that anyone interested might become part of his “couple” when searching for other single women ? … I don’t know. Women, very rarely enjoy receiving unsolicited dick pics in my experience. I won’t send them. In fact I’m not always keen on sending them if they are asked for. Penises are not the most attractive objects !
bi**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 6 minutes ago, Glasgowdom1991 said: The law is simple you don't send the pics via private messaging or on a platform where it is reasonable to not expect to see pictures of that kind. So if nudity is part of the site such as it is here on feed that's fine but if you send a pic and it's opened and it's unexpected that's the crime . It really not hard don't sent pics of your 1/2 baldy pecker to people who haven't asked That means dick pics here are a-OK. Which is not correct. I'm sure you can claim it was acceptable on here, but you'll get many who will say its not. And so, off to prison for you. Which is likely, as anyone sending 1 dick pick is likely to be sending them to everyone. The law makes no differentiation between what is reasonable to expect. Quote The boundaries are clear and focus on the consent of the individual who will be receiving the image. If you don’t have enthusiastic consent, do not send the image But worse - the platform itself is now also required to take preventative measures. Maybe we won't be allowed to send pictures to someone at all soon. Quote 4.These amendments require providers to assess the risk of their services being used to commit or facilitate the commission of a priority offence, and to design their services to mitigate the risk of this occurring
Shilo66 Posted March 20 Posted March 20 Although this conviction is good news, I *** it will make little difference, because many women, for a variety of reasons still WON'T report such incidences! I've lost count of the number of times I've tried to get a female friend, relative or associate to do so when such things have happened to them, but they just won't. This site is a prime example. Lots of women complain about receiving unsolicited d*ck pics here, but few will actually report the perpetrators (obviously they need to do so with evidence, such as a screenshot). Those perpetrators know this, so are emboldened to keep doing what they do as there is little *** of them getting caught. If more women here actually reported these guys, then the admins would know who the culprits are and will be able to do something about them, but they can't without those reports. For example, if 10 women report the same guy (with evidence as above of his wrong doing) sending them d*** pics, then it would be very difficult for the admins NOT to know that particular guy was a problem. So ladies, remember " the Me Too movement" and report, report, report!!!... and clear out some of the dross, you won't be harming the good guys, we don't send unsolicited di*k pics. Oh and before someone says something lame like guys should be doing more to prevent this, or guys shouldn't be sending d*ck pics in the first place.... remember: 1) We guys don't get the d*ck pics, so we can't report on your behalf. 2) It's the d*ck heads who are sending you the d*ck pics, not the normal guys - well, normal as best can be described on a Kink Site.
bi**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 ...I'm sure if someone's consenting to it it's different. Women typically don't like receiving unsolicited pics. What are y'all complaining about.
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 7 minutes ago, Shilo66 said: Although this conviction is good news, I *** it will make little difference, because many women, for a variety of reasons still WON'T report such incidences! I've lost count of the number of times I've tried to get a female friend, relative or associate to do so when such things have happened to them, but they just won't. This site is a prime example. Lots of women complain about receiving unsolicited d*ck pics here, but few will actually report the perpetrators (obviously they need to do so with evidence, such as a screenshot). Those perpetrators know this, so are emboldened to keep doing what they do as there is little *** of them getting caught. If more women here actually reported these guys, then the admins would know who the culprits are and will be able to do something about them, but they can't without those reports. For example, if 10 women report the same guy (with evidence as above of his wrong doing) sending them d*** pics, then it would be very difficult for the admins NOT to know that particular guy was a problem. So ladies, remember " the Me Too movement" and report, report, report!!!... and clear out some of the dross, you won't be harming the good guys, we don't send unsolicited di*k pics. Oh and before someone says something lame like guys should be doing more to prevent this, or guys shouldn't be sending d*ck pics in the first place.... remember: 1) We guys don't get the d*ck pics, so we can't report on your behalf. 2) It's the d*ck heads who are sending you the d*ck pics, not the normal guys - well, normal as best can be described on a Kink Site. How about we don't put the responsibility on the victims (whatever gender). "Trying to get" someone to do something they don't want is abhorrent, particularly when they've already experienced a form of trauma. Reporting to Police is an option. It isn't a requirement. It's quite often just as harrowing for the victim as the incident itself. I spend a lot of my time working with the Police and yet I have very little trust in them as an agency. The Justice system as a whole does not work, you only need to look at various stats (and not just in relation to SA's) to realise that. Educating those committing the crime is where the focus should be.
Shilo66 Posted March 20 Posted March 20 (edited) 16 minutes ago, CopperKnob said: How about we don't put the responsibility on the victims (whatever gender). "Trying to get" someone to do something they don't want is abhorrent, particularly when they've already experienced a form of trauma. Reporting to Police is an option. It isn't a requirement. It's quite often just as harrowing for the victim as the incident itself. I spend a lot of my time working with the Police and yet I have very little trust in them as an agency. The Justice system as a whole does not work, you only need to look at various stats (and not just in relation to SA's) to realise that. Educating those committing the crime is where the focus should be. Your response makes no sense and is bad advice to others. As I've already stated, without reporting, how is the crime supposed to be picked up???? Without reporting, how are we supposed to do anything about it, if we don't know it's going on??? Without reporting, how are we supposed to know how bad, how deep and how far reaching the problem is??? This guy was caught because a lot of brave women reported him!... yes it took a while but it wouldn't have been possible at all if they hadn't. How about for a change, you suggest an actual viable solution to the problem. You can't "educate those committing the crime" if you don't who they are.... because they weren't reported! Edited March 20 by Shilo66
ey**** Posted March 20 Author Posted March 20 4 hours ago, BrumDom2023 said: Whilst a lot of the unsolicited pictures are often from men, women do it too, I've had pics sent to me from women, that I never requested & wasn't asked if I wanted to see them but were sent anyway. this also covered under the cyberflashing law however - this would be a little more to prove that it was sent to distress or humiliate you
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 6 minutes ago, Shilo66 said: Your response makes no sense and is bad advice to others. As I've already stated, without reporting, how is the crime supposed to be picked up???? Without reporting, how are we supposed to do anything about it, if we don't know it's going on??? Without reporting, how are we supposed to know how bad, how deep and how far reaching the problem is??? This guy was caught because a lot of brave women reported him!... yes it took a while but it wouldn't have been possible at all if they hadn't. How about for a change, you suggest an actual viable solution to the problem. You can't "educate those committing the crime" if you don't who they are.... because they weren't reported! Your comment reads as though you're angry with victims rather than (alleged) perpetrators. It didn't take time, he send the pics on the 09.02.24, he was sentenced this week, pretty quick for the English courts. We educate all *** on what is un/acceptable behaviours. In your suggestion you're bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 5 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said: this also covered under the cyberflashing law however - this would be a little more to prove that it was sent to distress or humiliate you But the same goes for men sending them to women... and i'm guessing that the vast majority that send them probably do so because they have personality disorders and/or are socially inept and think its a way of attracting women, not because they want to distress someone.
Shilo66 Posted March 20 Posted March 20 (edited) 3 minutes ago, CopperKnob said: Your comment reads as though you're angry with victims rather than (alleged) perpetrators. It didn't take time, he send the pics on the 09.02.24, he was sentenced this week, pretty quick for the English courts. We educate all *** on what is un/acceptable behaviours. In your suggestion you're bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted. My "comment" reads as no such thing... you're just annoyed because what I've said makes sense and what you've stated doesn't. 10 minutes ago, Shilo66 said: Your response makes no sense and is bad advice to others. As I've already stated, without reporting, how is the crime supposed to be picked up???? Without reporting, how are we supposed to do anything about it, if we don't know it's going on??? Without reporting, how are we supposed to know how bad, how deep and how far reaching the problem is??? This guy was caught because a lot of brave women reported him!... yes it took a while but it wouldn't have been possible at all if they hadn't. How about for a change, you suggest an actual viable solution to the problem. You can't "educate those committing the crime" if you don't who they are.... because they weren't reported! Edited March 20 by Shilo66
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 2 minutes ago, HatfieldMaster said: But the same goes for men sending them to women... and i'm guessing that the vast majority that send them probably do so because they have personality disorders and/or are socially inept and think its a way of attracting women, not because they want to distress someone. That's the flaw in the law. Just as with any law re SA, the burden of innocence/evidencing a crime has been committed falls to the victim.
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 1 minute ago, CopperKnob said: That's the flaw in the law. Just as with any law re SA, the burden of innocence/evidencing a crime has been committed falls to the victim. It's not that straight forward though. The law, i believe, has been designed to mirror public nudity laws. Being naked in public is not an offence, whereas flashing (which is essentially being naked in public) is an offence as its deemed to be done to distress, humiliate, intimidate the victim etc.
ge**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 18 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said: this also covered under the cyberflashing law however - this would be a little more to prove that it was sent to distress or humiliate you It also presumes the sender was actually a woman. . Whilst there probably are some women who send unsolicited unsavoury pics - the only ones that have sent them to me have either been men pretending to be women, or scammers (who may also be men pretending to be women) - in around 25 years of being on various sites I don't honestly think I've had an unsolicited genitals, or for that matter boobs, pic from a "woman" that doesn't fall into either of those categories.
ge**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 9 minutes ago, HatfieldMaster said: It's not that straight forward though. The law, i believe, has been designed to mirror public nudity laws. Being naked in public is not an offence, whereas flashing (which is essentially being naked in public) is an offence as its deemed to be done to distress, humiliate, intimidate the victim etc. I'd argue that sending an unsolicited dick pic is sent for precisely those reasons - it's certainly not sent to exhibit public nudity - especially when it's mostly not a flaccid pic being sent - it's an aggressive "look at me, I'm man, you woman" showing off designed at best to exert control and power (which in itself is intimidating), cause distress or humiliate. . Yes there may be blurred lines on sites like this where the (completely wrong) perception on the part of the sender is that it's sent to attract - and as such reporting it may make it harder to prove the intent but it's still both wrong and potentially an attempt at exerting control and power.
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 1 minute ago, gemini_man said: I'd argue that sending an unsolicited dick pic is sent for precisely those reasons - it's certainly not sent to exhibit public nudity - especially when it's mostly not a flaccid pic being sent - it's an aggressive "look at me, I'm man, you woman" showing off designed at best to exert control and power (which in itself is intimidating), cause distress or humiliate. . Yes there may be blurred lines on sites like this where the (completely wrong) perception on the part of the sender is that it's sent to attract - and as such reporting it may make it harder to prove the intent but it's still both wrong and potentially an attempt at exerting control and power. If this kind of behaviour was limited to so-called "Doms" on sites like this then maybe... but it's common practice on vanilla dating sites, and apps like tinder etc - which i believe is done more as a way of getting attention or showing off in order to attract someone. That's just how juvenile men act.
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 1 minute ago, HatfieldMaster said: If this kind of behaviour was limited to so-called "Doms" on sites like this then maybe... but it's common practice on vanilla dating sites, and apps like tinder etc - which i believe is done more as a way of getting attention or showing off in order to attract someone. That's just how juvenile men act. This is like arguing that r*pe is simply about a man getting his end away. It's not. it's only ever about power and control.
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 Just now, CopperKnob said: This is like arguing that r*pe is simply about a man getting his end away. It's not. it's only ever about power and control. So some idiot getting drunk on holiday and pulling their pants down "for a laugh" is doing so for power and control???
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 1 minute ago, HatfieldMaster said: So some idiot getting drunk on holiday and pulling their pants down "for a laugh" is doing so for power and control??? We're talking about cyberflashing?
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 Just now, CopperKnob said: We're talking about cyberflashing? Yes, but as i said, the inclusion of the intention to distress etc is there to bring the law in line with the existing public nudity laws.
CopperKnob Posted March 20 Posted March 20 3 minutes ago, HatfieldMaster said: Yes, but as i said, the inclusion of the intention to distress etc is there to bring the law in line with the existing public nudity laws. As I said, lacks credibility as a law and won't be as effective as this first case may have given people hope for.
ge**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 11 minutes ago, HatfieldMaster said: If this kind of behaviour was limited to so-called "Doms" on sites like this then maybe... but it's common practice on vanilla dating sites, and apps like tinder etc - which i believe is done more as a way of getting attention or showing off in order to attract someone. That's just how juvenile men act. You don't have to be a "so called Dom" to want to exert power or control - it's sadly from a misogynistic mindset that still exists in many men that makes them think it's acceptable. . They may "think" it's just an attraction technique, but regardless it's one that comes from a position of wanting to control and exert a level of power to a greater or lesser degree that comes from the caveman chest thumping mindset of, as I said, "me man, you woman". . There's been enough written about it, both in the news, or on sites/threads like this stating quite clearly how unacceptable most women find it - and yet a large enough proportion of men persist in doing it - and that in itself is evidence of them seeking to control and exert power by completely ignoring widely held beliefs about it's unacceptability.
Ha**** Posted March 20 Posted March 20 2 minutes ago, CopperKnob said: As I said, lacks credibility as a law and won't be as effective as this first case may have given people hope for. It was never designed or intended to be a catch-all and i imagine it will only be applied in limited circumstances, where for example they are sent to ***, or its part of a wider campaign of harassment/stalking etc.... and as shown by this first conviction, if it gives the CPS an extra opportunity to get dangerous people off the streets then it's serving a purpose.
Recommended Posts