Massachusetts: The pervert state

BastardofYoung · 03-06-2014, 01:53 PM

High Court Rules That Upskirt Photos Are Legal In Massachusetts | ThinkProgress

Yeah, upskirt photos are fine by them. Nice to see that the supreme court has the power to speak on behalf of our genitals. Who rules them now? Larry Flynt?

Black Francis · 03-06-2014, 02:40 PM

Idk i mean i guess it's not ok to take upskirts pics of women but then again some women like wearing incredibly short skirts that show everything and they know guys stare at them, i mean that's kinda why they dress like that and guys taking pictures of them is just a consequence of that.

Now im not blaming women in all this im just not absolving them from it cause females know when they are revealing too much and they know the effect it has on guys so maybe they shouldn't be wearing short mini skirts or super short pants where you can see everything if they don't want to be objectified in a sexual way.

Of course this doesn't justify a guy taking upskirt pictures of them that kinda voyeurism to me is still an invasion of privacy because that girl didn't agreed to be photographed.

And given that we all know these pics are taken by a horndog creeping up on a woman to take a picture of her underwear without her consent IT SHOULD BE punishable by law because the intention is to sexually exploit her.

~~butthead aka 216~~ · 03-06-2014, 02:42 PM

Can someone tldr or copy n paste the txt

Won't show up on my phone

BastardofYoung · 03-06-2014, 03:05 PM

here you go:

Quote:

It is not against the law to secretly take photographs up a woman’s skirt in Massachusetts, the state’s Supreme Judicial Court ruled Wednesday. The court dismissed charges against Michael Robertson, who was arrested by Boston transit police for taking photos and videos up multiple women’s skirts or dresses on the subway.

The judges sympathized with the notion that a woman should be able to have a reasonable expectation not to have secret photos taken up her skirt when she goes out in public, but ruled that current state law does not address that. Massachusetts’ “Peeping Tom” laws, as written, only protect women from being photographed in dressing rooms or bathrooms when they are undressed. Since upskirt photos are taken of fully clothed women in public, they don’t count, according to the court.

“A female passenger on a MBTA trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is `partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing,” the court wrote.

Robertson’s lawyers defended his actions by arguing the photos were a matter of free speech.

Upskirt photos are becoming increasingly common with the spread of camera phones, but the law is slow to catch up with new technologies. Under most voyeurism laws, women must have a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” which is difficult to prove when she is in public. The Massachusetts court is hardly the first to acquit men who take these photos; perpetrators in Oklahoma, Indiana, and Washington have all been cleared by judges because the laws on the books did not apply. In response to one case in which a man legally took upskirt photos of a 10-year-old girl, Indiana lawmakers passed an upskirt ban in 2011. Other states have considered but not passed similarly updated voyeurism laws.

BastardofYoung · 03-06-2014, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Francis

Idk i mean i guess it's not ok to take upskirts pics of women but then again some women like wearing incredibly short skirts that show everything and they know guys stare at them, i mean that's kinda why they dress like that and guys taking pictures of them is just a consequence of that.

Now im not blaming women in all this im just not absolving them from it cause females know when they are revealing too much and they know the effect it has on guys so maybe they shouldn't be wearing short mini skirts or super short pants where you can see everything if they don't want to be objectified in a sexual way.

Of course this doesn't justify a guy taking upskirt pictures of them that kinda voyeurism to me is still an invasion of privacy because that girl didn't agreed to be photographed.

And given that we all know these pics are taken by a horndog creeping up on a woman to take a picture of her underwear without her consent IT SHOULD BE punishable by law because the intention is to sexually exploit her.

The first line you give is like the classic "she had it coming, she was wearing a short skirt" rebuttal to a rape. Looking is one thing, but going out of your way to take a picture of someone like this on the basis of her attire, is pretty shallow and weak.

I do not think a womans choice in clothing should be the factor in any choice.

Wearing a short skirt, does not mean that she wants people to take pictures of her against her will. In the age of the internet where these pictures are not only extremely invasive, they are also used to be put onto sites to basically get the frat boy treatment of cries of wooooo and used only for objectication, another notch to the "look at this fine piece of ass" belt.

I do not think there is a single time when taking an upskirt picture on a bus or a public location is acceptable in any circumstance whatsoever.

This is basically just saying it is okay to repeat things like the first line of your comment and justify their perversion when the act is most likely based on the objectification of someone based on their choice of attire.

The last line of your comment also makes me go, alright, go up to any random girl you think is attractive on a public bus and ask her permission to take an upskirt picture, see what she says. Once you get up off the ground from most likely having a kick to the groin or a punch to the throat, let me know the results of this one.

Burning Down · 03-06-2014, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Francis

Idk i mean i guess it's not ok to take upskirts pics of women but then again some women like wearing incredibly short skirts that show everything and they know guys stare at them, i mean that's kinda why they dress like that and guys taking pictures of them is just a consequence of that.

Now im not blaming women in all this im just not absolving them from it cause females know when they are revealing too much and they know the effect it has on guys so maybe they shouldn't be wearing short mini skirts or super short pants where you can see everything if they don't want to be objectified in a sexual way.

Of course this doesn't justify a guy taking upskirt pictures of them that kinda voyeurism to me is still an invasion of privacy because that girl didn't agreed to be photographed.

And given that we all know these pics are taken by a horndog creeping up on a woman to take a picture of her underwear without her consent IT SHOULD BE punishable by law because the intention is to sexually exploit her.

Victim blaming at it's fucking finest, folks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

The first line you give is like the classic "she had it coming, she was wearing a short skirt" rebuttal to a rape. Looking is one thing, but going out of your way to take a picture of someone like this on the basis of her attire, is pretty shallow and weak.

I do not think a womans choice in closing should be the factor in any choice.

Wearing a short skirt, does not mean that she wants people to take pictures of her against her will. In the age of the internet where these pictures are not only extremely invasive, they are also used to be put onto sites to basically get the frat boy treatment of cries of wooooo and used only for objectication, another notch to the "look at this fine piece of ass" belt.

I do not think there is a single time when taking an upskirt picture on a bus or a public location is acceptable in any circumstance whatsoever.

This is basically just saying it is okay to repeat things like the first line of your comment and justify their perversion when the act is most likely based on the objectification of someone based on their choice of attire.

The last line of your comment also makes me go, alright, go up to any random girl you think is attractive on a public bus and ask her permission to take an upskirt picture, see what she says. Once you get up off the ground from most likely having a kick to the groin or a punch to the throat, let me know the results of this one.

Absolutely agreed.

BastardofYoung · 03-06-2014, 03:23 PM

What is "reasonable expectation not to have secret photos taken up her skirt when she goes out in public"? What does this say? A woman should feel guilty for having these pictures taken because she should expect that some guy with a phone is out there waiting to take pictures to satisfy his perversion? What message does this send? That perverts can get away with it because the person is not nude? That ruling is what scares me most in this. It is no different than slut shaming, putting the blame on the female for wearing a short skirt. That because she chose to do so, it is justifiable to exploit her for this choice. That is frightening. The fact that the supreme court, or any court for that matter can now say they have control over the safety and security of these people, and rule that they have say in your private parts is very scary.

~~butthead aka 216~~ · 03-06-2014, 03:26 PM

Thanks for copyin the txt

Umm well nothin wrong with taken pics imo but not like under the skirt or anythin. I always thought that was a weird fetish anyway lol. And just creepy. Remember that whole reddit debacle about /r/creepshots.. it kinda reminds me of that.

~~butthead aka 216~~ · 03-06-2014, 03:27 PM

Also I don't think its cool to villify Francis cuz I understand what he's sayin

Black Francis · 03-06-2014, 03:32 PM

lol why you guys make me sound like a rapist?

all im saying is the girl with half of her ass sticking out of her skirt is likely to attract pervs

I didn't make this ****ty world this way so don't blame me and YES girls have to take precautions regarding what they wear in public because like it or not women are objectified by their beauty

03-06-2014, 01:53 PM	#1 (permalink)
BastardofYoung Buzz Killjoy Join Date: May 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 2,692	Massachusetts: The pervert state High Court Rules That Upskirt Photos Are Legal In Massachusetts \| ThinkProgress Yeah, upskirt photos are fine by them. Nice to see that the supreme court has the power to speak on behalf of our genitals. Who rules them now? Larry Flynt? __________________ last.fm ‎"I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people." - Jack Handey.

03-06-2014, 02:40 PM	#2 (permalink)
Black Francis Out of Place Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: in an abstract house Posts: 4,111	Idk i mean i guess it's not ok to take upskirts pics of women but then again some women like wearing incredibly short skirts that show everything and they know guys stare at them, i mean that's kinda why they dress like that and guys taking pictures of them is just a consequence of that. Now im not blaming women in all this im just not absolving them from it cause females know when they are revealing too much and they know the effect it has on guys so maybe they shouldn't be wearing short mini skirts or super short pants where you can see everything if they don't want to be objectified in a sexual way. Of course this doesn't justify a guy taking upskirt pictures of them that kinda voyeurism to me is still an invasion of privacy because that girl didn't agreed to be photographed. And given that we all know these pics are taken by a horndog creeping up on a woman to take a picture of her underwear without her consent IT SHOULD BE punishable by law because the intention is to sexually exploit her. __________________ "Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A

03-06-2014, 03:23 PM	#7 (permalink)
BastardofYoung Buzz Killjoy Join Date: May 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 2,692	What is "reasonable expectation not to have secret photos taken up her skirt when she goes out in public"? What does this say? A woman should feel guilty for having these pictures taken because she should expect that some guy with a phone is out there waiting to take pictures to satisfy his perversion? What message does this send? That perverts can get away with it because the person is not nude? That ruling is what scares me most in this. It is no different than slut shaming, putting the blame on the female for wearing a short skirt. That because she chose to do so, it is justifiable to exploit her for this choice. That is frightening. The fact that the supreme court, or any court for that matter can now say they have control over the safety and security of these people, and rule that they have say in your private parts is very scary. __________________ last.fm ‎"I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people." - Jack Handey.

03-06-2014, 03:32 PM	#10 (permalink)
Black Francis Out of Place Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: in an abstract house Posts: 4,111	lol why you guys make me sound like a rapist? all im saying is the girl with half of her ass sticking out of her skirt is likely to attract pervs I didn't make this **ty world this way so don't blame me and YES girls have to take precautions regarding what they wear in public because like it or not women are objectified by their beauty __________________ "Hey Kids you got to meet the MIGHTY PIXIES!"** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbRbCtIgW3A

03-06-2014, 02:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
~~butthead aka 216~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: freely swimmin thru the waters of glory much like a majestic bald eagle soars thru the skies Posts: 1,463	Can someone tldr or copy n paste the txt Won't show up on my phone

03-06-2014, 03:26 PM	#8 (permalink)
~~butthead aka 216~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: freely swimmin thru the waters of glory much like a majestic bald eagle soars thru the skies Posts: 1,463	Thanks for copyin the txt Umm well nothin wrong with taken pics imo but not like under the skirt or anythin. I always thought that was a weird fetish anyway lol. And just creepy. Remember that whole reddit debacle about /r/creepshots.. it kinda reminds me of that.

03-06-2014, 03:27 PM	#9 (permalink)
~~butthead aka 216~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: freely swimmin thru the waters of glory much like a majestic bald eagle soars thru the skies Posts: 1,463	Also I don't think its cool to villify Francis cuz I understand what he's sayin